LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



rMf 



1ITED SI i^RICA. 



JKf 
■ 




' 












* i i ' i 












• 


■ 










H 
















V/i 



















■ 

£*9 












■ I 











LIFE 



Its True genesis 



v^. A >^ 



By R. W. WRIGHT 



[Masoretic Hebrew.] — J ynah"^ U ^**^"I TO**. — 

Ov zo aJC8Q[xa avzov iv avzo) xaxa yevog inl z?jg yrjg. [Septuagint.] 
"WHOSE germinal principle of life, each in itself after its kind, 

IS UPON THE EARTH." [Correct Translation.] 



s& 



his** %y. 



NEW YORK 

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

182 Fifth Avenue 

1880 






Copyright, 1880, by G. P. Putnam's Sons. 



TO 

The Rev. JOSEPH HALSTED CARROLL, D. D., 

OF 

NEWBURGH, N. Y., 

WHOSE ELOQUENT AND ABLE EXPOSITION OF BIBLE TRUTHS 
FIRST LED THE WRITER TO A CAREFUL AND COMPRE- 
HENSIVE PERUSAL OF THEM IN THE LIGHT OF 
NATURAL TRUTHS, AND WHOSE CONSTANT 
ENCOURAGEMENT HE HAS HAD IN THE 
PREPARATION OF THESE PAGES, 

THIS VOLUME 

IS GRATEFULLY AND AFFECTIONATELY INSCRIBED, 

BY THE 

AUTHOR. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Prefatory i 

Chapter I. — Introductory 9 

Chapter II. — Life — Its True Genesis 35 

Chapter III. — Alternations of Forest Growths 60 

Chapter IV. — The Distribution and Vitality of Seeds 89 

Chapter V. — Plant Migration and Interglacial Periods 123 

Chapter VI. — Distribution and Permanence of Species 153 

Chapter VII. — What is Life? Its Various Theories 177 

Chapter VIII. — Materialistic Theories of Life Refuted. ... 209 

Chapter IX. — Force-Correlation, Differentiation and other 

Life Theories 236 

Chapter X. — Darwinism Considered from a Vn alistic Stand- 
point 265 



PREFATORY. 



THE office of a preface is twofold ; first, to intro- 
duce the author to the public ; second, to in- 
troduce his work. As the writer seeks no personal 
introduction, beyond what a favorable or unfavorable re- 
ception of his work may give him, he leaves the more 
formal, if not formidable branch of salutation untouched. 

The work has cost him some labor, as the reader will 
see. The field he has traversed is vast and varied, and 
the facts he has gathered are numerous and from many 
and diversified sources — all bearing more or less conclu- 
sively on the one vital point he seeks to establish, viz : 
That the primordial germs {meaning germinal principles 
of life) of all living things, man alone excepted, are in 
themselves upon the earth, and that they severally make 
their appearance, each after its kind, whenever and wher- 
ever the necessary environing conditions exist. 

The foundation of this emphatic formula we find in the 
Bible Genesis, in the words given on our title-page, which 
are more accurately translated in the Septuagint, than 
in our common English version of the Old Testament. 
The words are to be found in the nth verse of the first 
chapter of Genesis, and the writer confidently believes 



2 PREFA TOR V. 

that they contain the true Genesis of Life, although 
entirely overlooked, heretofore, by both the biblical and 
scientific scholar. 

In the work which he here gives to the public, he will 
endeavor to show that all the vital phenomena of our 
globe, with the single exception named, find their com- 
plete explication in this Genesis of Life ; and that we 
have only to take the scientific Genesis out of some of 
its more imposing categories, to make the two either en- 
tirely harmonize, or fall into the same lines of incidence 
in human thought. 

Science has long taught that the absence of necessary 
physiological conditions results everywhere in the disap- 
pearance of vital phenomena ; by reversing its logical 
methods, it will also find that the presence of these nec- 
essary conditions results everywhere in the appearance of 
vital phenomena. Take, for instance, the vegetation of 
Northern Europe, where it is known that the oak suc- 
ceeded the pine, and the beech the oak, after each had 
held possession of the soil for we know not how many 
thousand years. In bringing about the necessary con- 
ditions of soil, the pine paved the way for the oak, and 
that in turn paved the way for the beech. Neither sprang 
from the other, nor did the " selection of the fittest " have 
anything to do with the appearance or disappearance of 
either. Each yielded fruit " after his kind," whose " seed " 
(germinal principle of life) was in itself, i. e^ after its own 
kind, upon the earth, and made its appearance spontan- 



FREFA TOR Y. 3 

eously, — that is, without the presence of natural seed, — 
whenever the necessary environing conditions favored. 

And the same law of vegetal propagation is everywhere 
operative to-day, in the alternations of forest growths, the 
spontaneous appearance of oak forests where pine have 
been cleared away, and vice versa, in some parts of the 
country, where heavy forests of oak timber have been 
felled. So with the new growths of timber springing up 
in the paths of tornadoes, over large burnt districts, in 
soils brought up from below the last glacial drift, and in 
hundreds of other instances which the reader will find 
conclusively verified in these pages, — all making their ap- 
pearance without the possible intervention of natural 
seeds. 

The great value of the Septuagint, as compared with 
other versions of the Hebrew Bible, will appear from the 
fact that it is older by many hundred years than any 
manuscript copy of the Hebrew text now extant. It was 
undoubtedly translated at Alexandria, in Egypt, as early 
as the third century before Christ, while the oldest known 
Hebrew MS. is a Pentateuch roll dating no further back 
than A. D. 580. Its translators had before them much 
older and more perfect MSS. than any that survived to 
the time of the masoretic recension, when an attempt was 
made to give uniformity to the readings and renderings of 
the Hebrew text by means of the vowel points, diacritical 
signs, terminal letters, etc., all of which are now subject 
to rejection by the best Oriental scholarship. 



4 PRE FA TOR Y. 

According to Irenaeus, this Greek version was ren- 
dered at the request of Ptolemy Lagi, in order to 
add to the treasures of the Alexandrian library, and it 
no doubt derived its name from the number of Hebrew 
and Hellenistic scholars, — probably the most eminent to 
be found in that day, — employed upon the work. The 
version comes, therefore, with paramount authority to 
our own times ; and we accept its Greek rendering as the 
highest and most conclusive evidence of the authenticity 
of the text, and the " new genesis of life " we derive 
therefrom. 

Znepfta (as contained in the Septuagint) has almost an 
identical signification with the Hebrew word ZRA. It 
means the " germ of anything/* or the " germinal princi- 
ple of life, " as contained in anything that lives or grows. 
No one will claim that it is used in its literal sense of 
"seed," in the text. For, when the divine command was 
issued, there was no plant or tree, and, presumably, had 
been none upon the earth from which seed could have 
been derived. The word was used in its larger and 
more comprehensive (that is, metaphorical) sense, as the 
" germinal principle of life in matter," or precisely in the 
sense in which the Greek stoics used it in their philosophy. 
Both Theophrastus and Diogenes use the terms 
G-epnavKol yoyot as expressing " the lazvs of generation con- 
tained in matter " — precisely the meaning we attach to 
it in its textual connection. The eleventh verse should 
read, therefore, as follows: " Let the earth bring forth 



FREFA TOR Y. 



5 



grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit-tree yielding 
fruit after his kind, whose germinal principle of life, each 
in itself after its kind, is upo?t the earth." 

We accept this rendering of " the seventy," because 
they had the most complete and perfect Hebrew MSS. 
before them, and were no doubt better scholars, and far 
more competent Tenderers of the original text than the 
Masorites who came some seven or eight hundred years 
after them. 

But this is not the most important point of inquiry 
in this connection. The materialistic objector may say : 
" Admit all this; grant that the true rendering is here 
given ; grant even that the true law of vegetal develop- 
ment and growth is here enunciated ; what has t star-eyed 
science 5 to do with the 'odium theologicuml" We an- 
swer, nothing. We would bury both theological rancor 
and atheistical pretension in the same barrow, and agree 
never to " peep and botanize " over their common grave. 
But if a great scientific principle — one that fits into all 
the phenomenal facts of nature — explains them all, and 
is, in turn, explained by them — be found in the Hebrew 
Hagiographa, of what less value is it to science than if it 
had been originally enunciated by Aristotle or Plato ? Or 
— to make the inquiry still sharper and more emphatic — 
of what less value is it to science than if it had originally 
come from Professor Tyndall or Mr. Herbert Spencer? 

Take the " biblical genesis " as we have enunciated 
and explained it — with all the facts crowded into these 



6 PRE FA TOR Y. 

explanatory pages — and science has no longer any gen- 
etic mystery to brood over, further than that every ope- 
ration of nature is a mystery into which it is useless for 
scientific speculation to pry. We know what nature does, 
or may know it by the proper scrutiny, but we shall 
never know the causes of things, any more than we shall 
find God at the bottom of Herbert Spencer's crucible, or 
at the top of his ladder of synthesis. In the light of the 
Bible genesis, science can account for the origin of the 
stalwart oak or the lordly pine, without going back to 
any mycological or cryptogamic forms, to follow down 
an ever-changing vital plexus that is as likely to land in 
a buttonwood tree as an oak, or in a hemlock as a pine, — 
in fact, quite as likely to land in a carnivorous animal as 
in an insectivorous plant. " Let the earth bring forth, ,J 
is still the eternal fiat, — just as implicitly obeyed to-day 
as it was in the world's primeval history, when an exube- 
rance of endogenous vegetation laid the foundation of 
the coal measures. It requires no greater effort on the 
part of nature to produce the pine, the oak, the beech, the 
hickory — all of which we see springing directly from pri- 
mordial germs to-day— -than it did to produce the lowest 
vegetal organism, from an invisible, indestructible " vital 
unit," or Darwinian gemmule, thousands of years ago. 

He who is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever, 
and in whose sight a thousand years are but as yesterday, 
knows no such u law of variability " as our materialistic 
friends have been spinning for us in their unverified 



PRE FA TOR Y. 7 

theories of evolution, natural selection, selection of the 
fittest, rejection of the unfit — force-correlations, molecular 
machinery, transmutation of physical forces, differentia- 
tion, dynamical aggregates, molecules organiques, poten- 
tiated sky-mist, undifferentiated " life-stuff/' and other 
hylotheistic and purely hypothetical formulae, with which 
the average mind has been well-nigh crazed for the last 
fifteen or twenty years. 

Believing that the time has come to call for "a halt " 
in scientific speculations, and a return to the phenomenal 
facts of nature as the true and only basis on which to for- 
mulate the immutable laws of life, matter, motion, etc., 
the writer submits this volume with trustful confidence 
to the public* 

R. W. Wright. 

West Cheshire, Conn. 

* It may be proper, however, to state that the tenth and concluding 
chapter was originally written as a lecture, and delivered about a year 
ago in New Haven, Boston, and at other points. A request for its publi- 
cation has induced the author to place it in this volume, with the portion 
referring to the Bible genesis omitted. It will be found germane to the 
general subject. 



TRUE GENESIS. 



CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

IT is undeniably true that the progress of scientific 
thought and speculative inquiry, both in this country 
and in Europe, is rapidly tending towards a purely ma- 
terialistic view of the universe, or one that utterly excludes 
the ancient and long-predominating metaphysical concep- 
tions of Life, to say nothing of the more regnant and 
universally prevailing conception of a God. And it is 
quite as undeniable that the current of experimental re- 
search and investigation is setting, with equal rapidity, in 
the same direction. According to the views of many of 
our more advanced chemists, physiologists, and other 
scientific and speculative writers and thinkers — those 
whose experimental investigations have, it is claimed, 
reached the ultimate implications of all material substance 
— there are but two immutable, indestructible, and 
thoroughly persistent elements in the universe — Matter 
and Motion. Everything else, they confidently assert, 
is either purely phenomenal, or else essentially mutable, 



10 TRUE GENESIS. 

ephemeral, transitory. Force, according to their theory, 
is only another name for motion or its correlates, and, 
hence, the two terms are interchangeably used by them 
in predicating their ultimate conclusions respecting matter. 

Light, heat, electricity, magnetism, chemical affinity, 
molecular force, and even life itself, are only so many 
manifestations or expressions, they claim, of one and 
the same force in the universe — Motion. With the ex- 
ception of matter, it is the only self-persistent, perma- 
nently enduring, ever active and reactive agency. 

Light, they say, is dependent, heat conditional, elec- 
tricity and magnetism more or less phenomenal, chemi- 
cal affinity and molecular force mere modes or correlated 
forms of motion, and all-pervading life itself a mere 
postulate of the schools, or at best only the result of the 
dynamic force of molecules. 

Deem not this collocation simply a burlesque on sci- 
entific categories. Professor Bastian, in his great work 
on the u Beginnings of Life," has unhesitatingly said : 
" The ' vitalists ' must give up their last stronghold — we 
cannot even grant them a right to assume the existence 
of a special ' vital force ' whose peculiar office it is to effect 
the transformation of physical forces. The notion that 
such a force does exist, is based on no evidence ; it is a 
mere postulate. The assumption of its existence carries 
with it nothing but confusion and contradiction, because 
the very supposition that it exists, and does so act, is totally 
averse to the general doctrine of the correlation of forces/ ' 



INTK OD UCTOR Y. 1 1 

And this defiant challenger of the " vitalists," who thus 
half-sneeringly speaks of those who believe that the vital 
forces of the universe are among the highest potential fac- 
tors expressed therein, is one who, for the last decade 
and a half, has mostly lived in the ephemeromorphic 
world, and who, in diving into the " beginnings of life," 
has so far lost his way that the all-glorious end of it is 
as much an inexplicable mystery to him now, as when he 
was more successfully expounding pathological anatomy 
and ruthlessly hacking away at anatomical subjects over 
thedissecting-slabof the London University College. Had 
he spent less time over this dissecting-slab, and more in 
studying the marvellous manifestations of life in its out- 
spoken beauty of leaf, bud, flower, fruit — things of not 
mere guess and fancy — he would undoubtedly have had 
a higher appreciation of what is most vital in nature, and 
less of what is simply material in a non-functional sense. 
With Mr. Herbert Spencer, he gratuitously sneers at 
the " old specific-creation hypothesis," or the divine fiat 
in the beginning ; but without that* fiat, where would he 
find his ephemeromorphs? or even the dead tissues used 
in his organic infusions for the vainest of all human 
endeavors — that of producing life, or seeking to produce 
it, de novo} He is so immeasurably disgusted with the 
vitalists that he hardly allows himself to speak of "life" 
or even use the term "vital" as applied to its simplest 
manifestations, without quotationizing them as terms to 
provoke both incredulity and derision. 



12 TRUE GENESIS. 

The world may, however, overlook much of this in 
him, in view of his past professional pursuits, as well as 
in consideration of his eminent services as a specialist in 
science. The dissecting-room of a university is not the 
most desirable place in the world for profoundly study- 
ing the vital forces of nature. It is too grim and ghastly 
a repository of dead men's skulls, and " holes where eyes 
did once inhabit," in which to regard " life's enchant- 
ing cup " as one sparkling to the brim. Detaching a 
muscle here, and laying bare another there ; taking out 
a sightless eye in one subject, and putting the dissecting- 
knife deep into the pulseless heart of another ; cutting 
the fragments of a human body into shreds and tatters 
over one dissecting-slab, and loading down another with 
splintered bones and mangled hands and limbs, is not ex- 
actly the sort of occupation to enkindle the highest en- 
thusiasm for " life," in any of its more manifold phases 
in nature. Too many lifeless notions get crammed into 
the head — to say nothing of baffled endeavor in the pur- 
suit — to admit of the more conclusive and satisfactory 
inductions respecting living organisms. 

But why should an assumption of the existence of 
life carry with it any greater " confusion and contradic- 
tion," than a like assumption respecting either matter or 
motion ? Simply because the materialists insist, in their 
logical inductions, upon so distributing the terms of their 
syllogism that only a negative conclusion shall follow. 

" Matter and motion," they say, are alone indestructible. 



INTRODUCTORY. 



13 



Life is neither matter nor motion, 

.\ Life is not indestructible. 

This syllogism is manifestly unanswerable, if there be 
no fallacy in the distribution of its major and minor terms. 
But wherein lies the incompatibility of reversing the order 
of its terms, so as to prove that neither matter nor motion 
is indestructible ? And would such a judgment, thus 
derived, be any more spurious, the process of reasoning 
any more illicit, or the conclusion any less unanswerable ? 
We might as well say that neither matter nor motion 
is an absolute entity in the universe, without some ap- 
prehensive intelligence, or rational intuition therein, to 
embrace them as distinct concepts or objects of thought ; 
nor can either have the least conceivable attribute with- 
out some co-existing intelligence to ascribe it. For to 
ascribe an attribute, is to conceive or think of such attri- 
bute. And as our general conceptions are conceded to 
be realities, even by the materialists themselves, it neces- 
sarily follows that this conscious ego — this thing that con- 
ceives, thinks, ascribes attributes — is either co-existent 
with matter, or else antedates it in the order of exist- 
ence. And here — at this identical point in the argument 
— we are irresistibly forced back, in our inductive pro- 
cesses, to the theological conception of a God — the one 
supreme Ego of the universe — from whom alone all our 
intuitions of consciousness, as well as apprehensive intelli- 
gence, is derived. 

We can no more get rid of these inductive processes 



14 TRUE GENESIS. 

than we can change the order of nature or reverse the in- 
evitable laws of thought. Hence, we are constantly 
driven to formulate the following, or some equivalent in- 
ductions : — 

1. Cause must exist before effect. 

2. Without some vital principle, therefore, preexisting 
as a cause, there can be no life-manifestation. 

3. But there can be no life-manifestation without or- 
ganic structure. 

4. The reverse of this proposition is also true. 

5. Which, therefore, precedes the other as a cause, 
and which follows as an effect ? 

6. Nothing can organize itself. To do so, it must con- 
tain within itself both the operating cause and the result- 
ing effect, which is at once an incongruent and conflictive 
judgment. 

7. But the thing that organizes must exist before the 
thing organized, whether it be a vital principle or an in- 
telligent agency. 

8. Hence Life, either as a preexisting cause or vital 
agency, must precede both animal and vegetal organism. 

Again : — 

9. Cause is that which operates to produce an effect, 
as effect is that which is produced by an operating cause. 

10. But whatever operates to produce a life-manifesta- 
tion must precede it as an operating cause. 

11. Life, therefore, whether as a blind or intelligent 
force or agency, must precede its own manifestation ; that 



INTRODUCTORY. 



15 



is, must exist as an operating cause before there is any 
produced effect. 

12. And this is true both as regards physical and 
moral effects. 

13. Our intuitions, as the final arbiters of judgment, 
demand this or some equivalent order as the only one 
embraced in a logical praxis. 

And since there can be no sound without an ear to 
appreciate it, so there be can no matter without an exist- 
ing egOy in some state of consciousness in the universe, to 
apprehend it — to ascribe to it attributes.* On what, there- 
fore, are we to predicate the existence of either matter or 
motion, except it be these intuitions of consciousness 
whose validity, so far as we have any knowledge whatever 
on the subject, rests exclusively on that " breath of life," 
which was breathed into man when he became a living 
soul ? But if our intuitions are not realities, then noth- 
ing is a reality. All is as unsubstantial, as vague and 
shadowy, as Coleridge's " image of a rock/' or Bishop 
Berkeley's " ghost of a departed quantity," as he once 
defined a fluxion. We may, therefore, retort upon Pro- 
fessor Bastian : — The " materialists," must give up their 
last stronghold — we cannot even grant them a right to 
assume the existence of either matter or motion, since 

* " Without this latent presence of the " I am," all modes of existence 
in the external world flit before us as colored shadows, with no greater 
depth, root, or fixure, than the image of a rock hath in the gliding stream, 
or the rainbow on the fast-sailing rain storm." — Coleridge s " Comments 
011 Essays." 



1 6 TRUE GENESIS. 

both manifestly depend, for their slightest manifestation, 
upon the more potent agency of " vital force," as expressed 
in thought, volition, and consciousness — that triumvirate 
of the intellectual faculties without which neither matter 
nor motion could have so much as a hypothetical exis- 
tence. 

The great trouble with Professor Bastian, as with Mr. 
Herbert Spencer, is that he advances a purely materialis- 
tic hypothesis, and then goes to work, with his quantita- 
tive and conditional restrictions, to eliminate all vital 
force from the universe. As he has been no more suc- 
cessful in finding God — the Infinite source of all life — at 
the point of his dissecting-knife, than has the speculative 
chemist at the bottom of his crucible, or Mr. Spencer at 
the top of his ladder of synthesis, he resolutely grapples 
with logic, as a last resort, and as remorselessly syllogizes 
God out of the universe as he would a mythological 
demon infecting the atmosphere of his dissecting-room. 
In the same way, he successfully syllogizes all life out 
of existence : although, in the very act of constructing 
his syllogism, he demonstrates its existence as conclusive- 
ly as that matter and motion are objective realities in the 
world of mind and matter which is about him. He fails 
to see, however, that the thing which demonstrates must 
necessarily precede the thing demonstrated, as life must 
necessarily precede its manifestation. In admitting the 
existence of " vital manifestation/' therefore, he virtually 
admits an antecedent vital principle, lying back of 



INTRODUCTORY. 



17 



an effect as a cause, which must exclude anything like 
a contradictory judgment, so long as the laws of the 
human mind, in respect to logical antecedents and con- 
sequents, remain as they are. 

Whatever may be the alleged inaccuracies of the Bible 
Genesis or the disputes heretofore indulged in respect- 
ing the Hagiographa, or " sacred writings" of the Jews, 
it will hardly be denied by the Biblical scholar that some 
of the most important discoveries in modern science, 
especially in the direction of astronomy, as well as in 
geological research and inquiry, confirm rather than throw 
doubt upon their more explicit utterances. This has been 
so marked a feature in the controversy, that whenever 
scientific speculation has thrown down any fresh gage of 
battle, as against the validity of these " sacred writings," 
the advocates of the latter have only had to take it up to 
dispel the mists of controversy and achieve a more con- 
clusive triumph than ever. For the truth of this state- 
ment it is only necessary for us to instance a few of the 
more important facts contained in the Bible Genesis. 
And should it be found that the writer of this volume has 
discovered, in a long overlooked, much neglected, and 
inaccurately translated passage of this Genesis, a key that 
unlocks the whole " mystery of life," as the great battle 
is now waging between the materialists and vitalists of 
this country and Europe, it will most conclusively es- 
tablish the point we shall here make — that in no equally 
limited compass, in ancient or modern manuscript or pub- 



xS true genesis. 

lished volume, since the first dawn of letters to the pre- 
sent time, are there to be found so many conclusively 
established facts of genuine scientific value as in the first 
chapter of Genesis. 

In dispelling the mists of prejudice, and possibly of 
doubtful translation, let us look this " genesis " squarely 
in the face : — 

i. Take the statement that "in the beginning " the 
earth was without form and void, and darkness rested 
upon the face of the depths. Here is not only no con- 
flict with science, but the great suggestive fact which 
led Laplace to construct his " Nebular Hypothesis/' or 
that magnificent system of world-structures which regards 
the universe as originally consisting of uniformly diffused 
matter filling all space, and hence "without form and 
void," but which subsequently became aggregated by 
gravitation into an infinite number of sun-systems, oc- 
cupying inconceivably vast areas in space. 

2. Nor can science well afford to cavil at that other 
most important suggestive statement that " the spirit of 
God " — the great formative force of the universe — moved 
upon the face of the depths, after which the evening 
and the morning were the first day, that is, the first dis- 
tinctive epoch in the order of creation. When material- 
istic science shall define " gravitation " — the supposed 
aggregating force of infinitely diffused matter in space — 
so as to make it a distinct and separate factor in the uni- 
verse from "the spirit of God," — that spirit which was 



INTRODUCTORY. 



■ 19 



breathed into man when he became a living soul, and 
which, we are told, " upholds the order of the heavens," 
then its devotees may sneer at the Bible Genesis, and the 
logical deductions to be drawn therefrom. 

3. Again, science can have no conflict with the Bible 
Genesis, except in the most hypercritical way, in the 
affirmative statement that God set two great lights in 
the firmament, the one to rule the day and the other to 
rule the night ; and that " he made the stars also." For 
it is nowhere stated that the " greater light " was not made 
to perform a similar office for each of the other planets 
of our system, or that it was not set in the firmament 
to adorn the skies of other and far-distant worlds, as 
" bright Arcturus, fairest of the stars," adorns our own. 

4. Nor can materialistic science dispute the more 
explicitly revealed fact, that the order of creation, so far 

at least as animal and vegetable life are concerned, is pre- 
cisely that to be found in geological distribution, or as 
unerringly recorded in the lithographic pages of nature. 
And yet nothing was known of these pages — not a leaf 
had been turned back — at the time the Bible Genesis was 
written. So that, whoever was its author, this precise 
order of distribution could only have been " guessed at, 5 ' 
setting aside its inspirational claims, by the writer of this 
most remarkable genesis. 

5. And again, science can have no successful conflict 
— certainly none in which she will ultimately come off 

victor — in reference to the equally explicit statement 



20 TRUE GENESIS. 

that every living thing, and every living creature, either 
yields seed, bears fruit, or brings forth issue, " after his 
kind," and distinctively none other. For this would 
seem to be the one inflexible law governing all living 
organisms, from which there can be no divergence in any 
such sense as the " scientific genesis," pretentiously so 
called, would authoritatively indicate. No " increase in 
variety," which Mr. Spencer regards as the " essential 
characteristic of all progress,'' will ever enable us " to 
gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles." 

6. Nor will materialistic science ever succeed in over- 
throwing the Bible theory herein advanced, that "the 
germs of all living things, man only excepted, are in 
themselves (that is, each aft t its kind) upon the earth," 
and that they severally make their appearance whenever 
the necessary environing conditions occur. This most 
remarkable statement of the Bible genesis will be found 
to fit into all the vital phenomena occurring upon our 
globe, explaining the appearance of infusoria, all myco- 
logical and cryptogamic forms, as well as all vegetal and 
animal organisms. All these come from "the earth 
wherein there is life," and hence the divine command for 
the earth " to bring forth " every living thing (except 
man) u after his kind." 

But let us embrace, in the proper antithetical sum- 
mary of statements, some of the more distinctive points 
of antagonism between the Bible genesis and that of 
materialistic science : — 



INTRODUCTORY. 21 

NESIS. THE SCIENTIFIC GENESIS. 



I. The Bible Genesis presents 
the theological conception of a God, 
or an Infinite Intelligence in the 
universe, with whom, as personified, 
there is no variableness, neither 
shadow of turning:. 



2. The Bible Genesis represents 
every living thing as fiei-fect of its 
kind, which the earth was com- 
manded to bring forth from seed or 
"germs," declared to be in them- 
selves upon the earth. 



3. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as causing to grow, out of the 
ground, every tree that is " pleasant 
to the sight and good for food," also 
every plant of the field " before it 
was in the earth/' and every herb of 
the field " before it grew." 



4. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as causing the waters of the 
earth to bring forth abundantly great 
whales and every living creature that 
moveth therein, and every winged 
fowl that flieth above the earth in 
the open firmament of heaven. 



1. The Scientific genesis virtually 
eliminates the idea of a God from 
the universe, by assigning to natural 
causes all the diversified and myriad- 
formed phases and changes that have 
taken place therein, extending 
through an infinite duration of past 
time, and constantly confronted by 
an infinite duration of time to come. 



2. The Scientific Genesis repre- 
sents every living thing as more or 
less imperfect of its kind, but ad- 
vancing towards perfection by some 
underlying law of variability or selec- 
tion of the fittest, or by gradual de- 
velopment from lower into higher 
c ganisms. 

3. The Scientific Genesis emphati- 
cally repudiates the idea of any divine 
agency in the growth of plants and 
trees, and insists that " life," in all 
its manifold phases, is only " an un- 
discovered correlative of motion," or, 
at best, only a sort of tertium quid be- 
tween matter and motion. 

4. The Scientific Genesis repre- 
sents all fishes, amphibia, reptiles, 
birds, etc., as travelling along their 
respective lines of developmental 
progress and differentiation, from 
points far back in geologic time, and 
constantly working their way up from 
cold and flabby creatures into those 
of higher cerebral activity, and 
brighter and more varied life, until 



22 



TRUE GENESIS. 



5. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as causing the earth to bring 
forth every living creature " after his 
kind/' enumerating them in the order 
in which they appear in geological 
distribution. 



6. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as making man in his own im- 
age, after he had commanded the 
waters and the earth to bring forth 
abundantly of every other living crea- 
ture. 



7. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as breathing into man " the 
breath of life," and he became a 
" living soul," 



8. The Bible Genesis represents 
God as creating the earth for the 
abode of man — giving him dominion 
over the fish of the sea, the fowl of 
the air, the beasts of the earth, and of 
every living thing that creepeth upon 
the face of the earth. 



gigantic winged reptiles mounted 
into the air and became birds. 

5. The Scientific Genesis attributes 
the appearance of every living crea- 
ture upon the earth to a law of " evo- 
lution," by which one thing con- 
stantly overlaps another, forming a 
sort of stairway for lower organisms 
to climb into higher, without regard 
to " kind," or even orders, genera, or 
species. 

6. The Scientific Genesis dis- 
tinctly takes issue with that of the 
Bible respecting the divine origin of 
man, and insists that he has been 
climbing up from protoplasmic mat- 
ter, through a thousand other and 
lower organisms, until he finally leap- 
ed from an anthropoid ape into man. 

7. The Scientific Genesis em- 
phatically repudiates the idea of a 
soul as thus derived, and even insists 
that " conscience," the highest known 
moral factor in the universe, is only 
a modified expression of the social 
instincts of the lower animals — the 
difference being in degree only, not 
in kind. 

8. The Scientific Genesis prompt- 
ly takes issue with this creative plan 
and purpose — insisting, in the daz- 
zling speculations and fancies of its 
adherents, that well known physical 
and physiological laws have worked 
out all these phenomenal aspects and 
changes, and that these laws are 



INTRODUCTORY. 



23 



9. The Bible genesis represents 
God as exercising a moral govern- 
ment over man, to the exclusion of 
every other living creature. 



10. In fine, the Bible Genesis rep- 
resents man as only " a little lower 
than the angels." 



wholly indifferent as to whether 
man shall have dominion over the 
shark and the tiger, or they domin- 
ion over him. 

9. The Scientific Genesis illogi- 
cally insists that "natural laws," — 
those expressing no sovereign will, 
and having " no seat in the bosom of 
God" — are fully adequate for the 
government of man, he exercising to 
that end all the higher intellectual 
and moral powers with which, by evo- 
lutional changes, he has become en- 
dowed. 

10. While the Scientific Genesis 
represents him as only a little higher 
than the apes ! 



And yet no scientific authority has ever been claimed 
for these sacred Hebrew writings. They were simply 
designed as a rule of human faith and conduct, ostensibly 
having the divine sanction, and containing historical, 
devotional, didactic, and prophetical writings, to be read 
through, at least once a year, in the Jewish synagogues. 

But the most important of these antithetical state- 
ments, so far at least as modern scientific research and 
inquiry are concerned, is that which represents the germs 
of all living things — man alone excepted — as being im- 
planted in the earth itself. We take the definition of the 
Hebrew word ZR A, translated " seed " in the nth verse 
of the 1st chapter of Genesis, from Professor Edward 
Leigh, of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, in his " Critica Sacra," 



24 TRUE GENESIS, 

first published in 1662: — " Spar sit, asparsit, cum asper- 
sione fudit, diffudit" etc, that is, " something sown, 
scattered, universally diffused, everywhere implanted, " 
as a germ in the earth. That the Hebrew word Z RA. 
does not mean, in this connection, the seed of a plant or 
tree, is manifest from the fact that the first plant or tree, 
from which " seed " could have been derived, had not yet 
appeared upon the earth. 

The exact translation is, " whose primordial germs 
are in themselves (that is, each after its kind) upon the 
earth, ' implanted therein, as the " diver sa diversorum 
viventium primordia v of Dr. William Harvey, were 
originally implanted in the earth. This illustrious phy- 
sician and biologist, the discoverer of the circulation of 
the blood, not only taught the doctrine expressed in his 
phrase " omne vivum ex ova" but that of " primordial 
germs" — living indestructible " principles of life" — ex- 
isting in the earth itself. For it is evident that he uses 
the word " egg" in its more general sense, as designating 
any material substance capable of receiving his " prim- 
ordium " (first principle of life) and developing itself into 
a living organism. 

The whole controversy, as at present conducted by 
the materialists and vitalists, resolves itself into this one 
question : — Whether life springs from what Dr. Harvey 
calls a " primordium," — a pre-existing vital germ or unit 
— or whether it originates de novo, as the materialists as- 
sert, from infusions contained in their experimental flasks, 



IN TROD UCTOR Y. 25 

or from plastide particles contained in protoplasmic mat- 
ter, or from the still more daring hypothesis of " mole- 
cular machinery" as worked by molecular force ? It is 
certain that the materialistic theory is quite as inex- 
plicable, on the basis of analogical reasoning and micro- 
scopical investigation, as that indicated in the Bible 
Genesis ; while the vitalistic theory would seem to be 
more in harmony with vital phenomena, and hence the 
more rational hypothesis of the two. Besides, the Bible 
Genesis answers to the logical necessity of predicating a 
determinate cause for each and every vital effect, or each 
living organism apparently springing from plasmic con- 
ditions or mere structureless matter. Whenever the 
seeds of plants or trees are actually planted or sown in 
the earth, this logical necessity rests on an induction im- 
pregnably laid in cause and effect ; while the materialistic 
dogma, nihil ex nikilo, would necessitate a like induction 
wherever seed is not sown. In either case the change 
that ensues is manifestly due to vital properties, whether 
the same be inhering in the seed, or in necessary envir- 
oning conditions. And the vital processes are the same, 
with the single difference as to actual environment. 

The germ in the seed is capable of assimilating, by 
well-determined and thoroughly specialized processes, 
the nutrient matter contained in its environment, pre- 
cisely as the " primordial germ " develops under its en- 
vironing conditions. From the moment they strike their 
rootlets into the ground, the processes of development 



26 TRUE GENESIS. 

and growth are the same. The only point, however, 
necessary to make in this connection, is, that when we go 
back to the first living organism of a species — its prim- 
ordially developed form — we necessarily reach environing 
conditions within which there is no such thing as a germ- 
cell with an exterior environment corresponding to the 
testa of seeds, or to any conceivable notion we may 
have of seeds themselves. 

At this point — one not merely theoretical, or specula- 
tively possible only, but absolutely fixed and determina- 
ble in our backward survey of the vital forces of nature — 
we find individual parentage lost in a natural matrix, or in 
the vital principle implanted as a " primordium," in the 
earth itself. To this inevitable induction of Dr. Harvey 
w r e are all driven in the end, by those intuitive processes 
of reasoning which are hardly less conclusive than mathe- 
matical induction itself. We may call these " prim- 
ordia viventium " plastide particles, bioplasts, vital units, 
or whatsoever we will, — the name is nothing, the work- 
ing process is everything. Scientific speculation ac- 
complishes nothing, therefore, by its new terminology, 
except it be to confound the ignorant and astonish the 
wise. To call the homogeneous basis of an egg " blast- 
ima, ,, and its germinal point a " blastid," is all well 
enough in its way ; but it adds no new knowledge, nor 
additional wealth of language, wherewith to predicate 
vital theories, whether they relate to the progeny of a 
hen-coop or the lair of a tiger in an Indian jungle. 



INTRODUCTORY. 



27 



Teach us to know what nature does, not what she is; 
and whatever of " divine revelation" is vouchsafed us, 
whether it be found in the majestic " Poem of the Dawn," 
attributed to the inspired pen of Moses, in the " myriad- 
minded Shakespeare/' or the irradiated and deeply-pro- 
phetic soul of a Shelley, let us accept it with thanks, if 
not to the inspired authors themselves, at least to " the 
great Giver of life " who imparted their inspiration. 

We accept the theory of " primordial germs," not 
simply because it is contained in the Bible Genesis, nor 
because it was conceived by the great and gifted Harvey 
as a possible solution of the whole difficulty, but because 
it presents, as we have before said, a satisfactory explana- 
tion of all the phenomenal facts of life with which we are 
acquainted. If Mr. Herbert Spencer will descend from 
his stilted theory of " molecular machinery worked by 
molecular force," and tell us what it all means; and, at 
the same time, turn us out a single plastide particle, or 
fungus spore, by any generating process referable to 
"the machinery" in question, we will as devoutly wor- 
ship Matter and Motion as ever ancient Egyptian did the 
god Osiris. But until he does this, we prefer to accept 
the positive assurance of Professor Lionel S. Beale, a 
far more competent authority to speak of hypothetical 
molecules, that none of the " forces possessed by the 
molecules of which the primitive nebulosity of the 
universe was composed '' ever produced a vital manifes- 
tation, or succeeded in " making life a slave to force." We 



28 TRUE GEXESIS. 

shall consider this question of " molecular force " in its 
proper place, and with reference to the different theories 
of life advanced by the materialists, without pursuing it 
further in this connection. 

The evidence we shall present in reference to the al- 
ternations of forest growths, and the impossibility of ac- 
counting for them on any theory of seed-distribution— 
alternations covering, in many instances, independent for- 
ests springing up on a vast scale — and the still wider 
dispersion of domestic weeds, grasses, forage plants, etc., 
in localities where they were never known before, will be 
conclusive, we think, of the correctness of our position, 
that the Bible Genesis contains the true key to the mystery 
of life. Bear in mind that the true theory of life, when- 
ever it shall be reached in human conception and formu- 
lated into definitely-known processes of action, must satis- 
factorily explain all life-manifestations, as Newton's theory 
of gravitation accounts for the movements of all celestial 
bodies. And the simpler the theory when once formu- 
lated — the more perfectly it falls into the grooves of defi- 
nitely-expressed thought, and the more harmoniously it 
adapts itself to all vital manifestations — the more conclu- 
sive must be the induction on which it rests.* The em- 
phatic statement that the/' primordial germs " of all liv- 
ing things are in the earth, from the lowest infusorial 

* And science that is not purely inductive — i. e. primarily based on the 
inviolability of our intuitions — is no science at all, but the sheerest possible 
speculation. 



INTR OD UC TOR Y. 2 g 

form to the highest vital organism below " specifically- 
created " man, when supplemented by the scientific state- 
ment that " vital units" make their appearance whenever 
environing conditions favor, is conclusively a theory which 
accounts for all the life-manifestations heretofore occurring 
upon our globe. 

And this theory falls at once into the necessary cat- 
egories of human thought. Life, as generally defined, is 
a state of organized being wherein there is functional ac- 
tivity ; while a state, or status, is an incidence determined 
by environing conditions. But back of each of these — 
life and its status — there must lie some efficient cause, 
producing, in the first instance, the environing conditions, 
and then the functional activity dependent on organiza- 
tion. To assume that this efficient cause is simply the 
effect or result of organization — one of its dependent 
conditions — is begging the whole question, and, at the 
same time, discarding a very important element in the 
problem — that of conditional environment. What this 
efficient cause is, is a question that awakens no responsive 
inquiry. It strikes its roots too deeply into the intuitions 
of consciousness for the soul to give back an intelligible 
reply. Certain it is that neither metaphysical specula- 
tion, nor scientific inquiry, will ever enable us to reach 
the roots of this question, or extract from them the first 
quantitive essence of life itself. 

We shall also consider, in their proper place, the va- 
rious theories of life which have been advanced from 



30 



TRUE GENESIS. 



time to time by the materialists, in their avowed hostility 
to current religious beliefs, and especially those founded 
on the sacred Hebrew writings, and the supplementary 
teachings of the New Testament. And to show the ex- 
tent of this hostility, and the real animus of those 
waging it, it is only necessary to refer to the great cen- 
tral doctrine of the Sacred Scriptures, that Life — natural, 
spiritual, eternal — is " the gift of God." And this is the 
grand corner-stom of all religious edifices — those erected 
by the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Phoenicians, the 
Greeks, and even the inhabitants of farther India. Mate- 
rialistic science must, therefore, deal its first and most 
effective blows at " Life," either as a theory to be reso- 
lutely assailed and overthrown, or else thoroughly ignored 
and set aside, in the more imposing and august temple 
of Science. Hence, the reader will find, in none of the 
great encyclopedias prepared under the supervision of 
scientific men, the slightest mention whatever of " Life " 
as a subject worthy of consideration at their hands. It 
finds, of course, its meagre definitional place in the dic- 
tionaries, but the bulky and more exhaustive encyclo- 
pedias have no room for it, except as it may be defined, 
under some correlate of motion, as "the latent possi- 
bility of a nebula," or of " undifferentiated primeval 
mist," originally pervading the interplanetary spaces. 

We have no disposition to charge such materialists as 
Professors Tyndall, Bastian, Haeckel, Virchow, and Mr. 
Herbert Spencer, with directing their experimental batter- 



INTRODUCTORY. 



31 



ies against the phenomenal facts of " life " for the purpose 
of overthrowing the foundations of religious faith and be- 
lief in the world. They are all eminent scientists, and 
apparently earnest seekers after truth in the several di- 
rections in which their respective paths of investigation 
have been pursued. But they manifestly array their 
opinions against the vitalists on the assumption that there 
is no scientific value whatever in the many and singularly 
diversified statements respecting " life, " in both the Old 
and New Testaments. And this, it may be claimed, is 
necessitated by the generally accepted dogma, that sci- 
ence and religion are more or less hostile, the former 
resting on the inexorable logic of facts only, and the latter 
entirely on /^conceived and /^judicial notions respecting 
faith and belief. To this position of theirs we have no 
objection to make, so long as they subject their scientific 
statements to the one rigid ordeal of positively ascer- 
tained facts. But when they set themselves to spinning 
their theories of life on the strength of " nebular potent- 
ialities," and the possibilities of " undifferentiated sky 
mist," we must insist that they are infinitely wider of 
the mark than the theologians who claim that the great 
formative power of the universe is God, and that his 
" spirit," and not gravitation, u upholds the order of the 
heavens : " — certainly much wider of the mark than was 
Pope, when he wrote of the universe : — 

" All are but parts of one stupendous whole, 
Whose bodv nature is. and God the soul." 



32 TRUE GENESIS. 

The truth is, that religion is quite as much the hand- 
maid of science as science can be said to be the handmaid 
of religion. She breathes far more household laws for 
her devotees, if she does not veil her " sacred fires "more 
modestly from the sight of men. She is certainly less 
dogmatic, less dictatorial, less abounding in positive as- 
sertion, than what now passes for " science," in the pop- 
ular estimation. Perhaps Mr. Herbert Spencer repre- 
sents the scientific side of a greater number of questions 
agitating the public mind to-day, than any other one man, 
and he is still industriously engaged in solving, or en- 
deavoring to solve, a greater number of social problems. 
And yet the most enthusiastic admirer of this gentleman 
will be forced to admit, when driven to the wall of actual 
controversy, that one-half, if not two-thirds, of his more 
formidable statements, put forth in the name of science, 
remain undemonstrated as scientific truths. We are thank- 
ful enough, however, for the one-third he has vouchsafed 
us to let the other two-thirds pass as the dogmatic 
achievements of his wonderfully gifted pen. 

Professor Beale asks the question, whether " a man 
who has the gift of science must ever be wanting in the 
gift of faith? " It is certain that this inquiry sharply em- 
phasizes the antagonism at present existing between ma- 
terialistic science and religious faith. But there is only 
one reason why this antagonism should be continued, 
and that is, the persistent claim of science to superior re- 
cognition in all cases where there is the slightest appa- 



INTRODUCTORY. 



33 



rent conflict between the two. Certainly no man ever 
did more to popularize the genuine truths of science in 
this country than Professor Agassiz, or worked more 
successfully to that end. He was willing to place the 
decorative wreath on the starry forehead of science, but 
refused to pluck from the soul " the starry eyes of faith 
and hope," that man might be dwarfed down to the; 
"nearest of kin " to the anthropoid ape. 

When we come to this assumed relationship in gen- 
etic types, we have not so much as laid the first abut- 
ment of the bridge by which these revivers of Lucretian 
materialism would span the chasm between mind and mat- 
ter, between the spiritual and physical side of man, be- 
tween dark brute sense and " a soul as white as heaven. " 
For going back to undifferentiated primeval mist, and 
following down the whole line of vital phenomena, from 
whatever subtle molecular combinations their first mani- 
festation may have arisen, until we reach the highest dif- 
ferentiated organism below man, we shall find the chasm 
between the physical and the psychical not a thousandth 
part spanned. And even if man, with the assistance of 
all the maleficent spirits that " walk the air both when 
we wake and sleep," could span this chasm, it would be 
only by another bridge of Mirza across which no daring 
mortal could ever pass. 

Mr. Herbert Spencer, in his " Principles," thinks he 
has mastered the necessary psychological, if not mechan- 
ical, engineering for the successful construction of this 



34 TRUE GENESIS. 

bridge. In that branch of his work entitled the " Prin- 
ciples of Psychology," he so far abandons the exact sci- 
entific method as to take up psychical phenomena, and 
deal with them genetically, as he would with the phenom- 
enal manifestations of organic life, in the continuous 
chain of ideas every where presented as consecutive 
thoughts in the universe. He finds, or claims to find, in 
these psychical manifestations, a constant tendency to- 
wards differentiation — towards advanced and continuously 
advancing differences, varieties, and new modes of 
thought — the same as, or similar to, those taking place in 
living organisms. He accordingly assumes, for the 
science of mind, as complete a foundation on which to 
base the doctrine of " evolution, " as in the case of either 
physical or physiological science. But he is no less 
troubled, in this psychological realm, with divergent va- 
rieties, and exceptional variations and changes, than when 
he plants himself on the more solid substratum of life in 
the abounding realm of nature. His psychological differ- 
entiations present too many and constantly-shifting diver- 
gencies and re-divergences — exceptional branchings in one 
direction, and still more exceptional in another — to ad- 
mit of any sufficiently potentiated potentiality for bridge 
timber. The arch to such a bridge would have to abut, 
according to Professor Tyndall, on a vital foundation 
at one end, and spring from undifferentiated sky-mist at 
the other. 

The bridge will never be built. 



CHAPTER II. 

LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 

THE profound Newton did not attempt to show 
what the gravitative force of the universe was. 
He bore himself more modestly, only endeavoring to 
show that such a force existed, and that it accounted 
for all the movements of celestial bodies, even to their 
slightest perturbations. He frankly admitted his inability 
to determine what this force was, but by observations 
and calculations made with the greatest care, he ascer- 
tained that its action upon matter was proportional to 
its mass directly, and to the square of its distance in- 
versely ; and, with the requisite data and the principles of 
pure geometry, he demonstrated that this mysterious 
force — utterly inapproachable by human conception in 
its mystery — not only governs and controls the move- 
ments of all the mighty masses of matter rolling in space, 
but transmits its influence — not successively, but in- 
stantly and without diminution — to the smallest con- 
ceivable molecule on the outlying boundaries of the 
universe. In the same calm and comprehensive spirit, 
if it be possible for us to reach it, let us look upon this 
mysterious force called " life/* not to show that it is 
simply a " correlate " of this or that motion (a thing 



36 TRUE GENESIS. 

utterly impossible of demonstration, if it actually exists), 
but to ascertain how and in what way it acts, and by 
What known law, if any, it is governed. 

In all the vast realm of Reality there is no more 
conclusive and palpable fact than that " life " exists — 
appearing wherever the bright light flashes, the loving 
raindrop falls, the dancing brook ripples, the sparkling 
streamlet murmurs, and the broad river flows to mingle 
with the sea. All along this bright pathway of sunlight 
and cool translucent wave, this wonderful principle of 
vitality manifests itself in all-glorious life — filling the air 
with balmy odors ; making perennial bud, leaf and flower, 
speeding from sire to son, from heart to heart, from spirit 
to spirit, from age to age, from time into eternity.* For 
like all living principles, in this realm of Reality, it cannot 
die. It is immortal in its primal source, immortal all 
along its bright pathway, immortal as it flows onward 
to eternity, immortal in its return to the bosom of God. 
It is no postulate, no corollary, no mere hypothethical 

* This presence of an active living principle in nature, one originally 
assigned as the " divines fiarticula aicrce" of every living thing, is frequently 
referred to in the higher inspirational moods of our poets. Wordsworth 
exquisitely refers to it in the following lines of his " Excursion : " — 

11 To every form of being is assigned 
An active principle : howe'er removed 
From sense and observation, it subsists 
In all things, in all nature, in the stars 
Of azure heaven, the unenduring clouds ; 
In flower and tree, in every pebbly stone 
That paves the brooks." 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



37 



judgment ; no " undiscovered correlative of motion/' 
no " baseless fabric of a vision " — but the one grand 
comprehensive Datum on which all the objective, 
as well as subjective, data of the universe rest. It is 
the same " spirit that moved upon the face of the 
depths/' in that majestic Dawn of Creation when the 
" evening and the morning were the first day ; " the same 
spirit that " upholds the order of the heavens ;" that 
pervades the vast realm of Reality, that flashes in the 
bright sunlight, descends in the loving raindrop, ripples 
in the dancing brook, sparkles in the murmuring stream, 
and forever flows onward bearing its primal fulness to 
the sea. 

To deny the existence of this vital principle because 
we cannot bottle it up in our airless flasks: to reduce it 
to some unknown correlate of motion because it constantly 
defies our poor mental grasp ; to insist upon its artificial 
production because elementary substances may be chem- 
ically handled in our laboratories — is the same sort of 
preposterous folly that Newton would have been guilty 
of, had he attempted to. show that there was no such 
thing as "gravity" in the universe; that it was only 
some undiscovered correlative of a thermal limit, — some 
unknown molecular complexity or entanglement in cos- 
mic ether — some spontaneously occurring affinity or an- 
tagonism of ethereal molecules in the interplanetary 
spaces — some " potentiated potentiality " of mere sky- 
mist, — conditions of which he could have had no experi- 



38 TRUE GENESIS. 

mental knowledge, nor have given the slightest analogical 
proof. That we are justified in thus partially travestying 
the technical methods of some of our modern scientists, 
so called — especially those of the materialistic school — 
those advocating a purely physical theory of life, we 
need only quote a sentence or two from Professor Lionel 
S. Beale, of King's College, London. This eminent 
physiologist, in his recent work on " The Mystery of 
Life," says : " Notwithstanding all that has been asserted 
to the contrary, not one vital action has yet been ac- 
counted for by physics and chemistry. The assertion 
that life is correlated force rests upon assertion alone, 
and we are just as far from an explanation of vital 
phenomena by force-hypotheses as we were before the 
discovery of the doctrine of the correlation of forces." 
And he further adds that each additional year's labor, 
in this special field of investigation, " only confirms him 
more strongly than ever in the opinion that the physical 
doctrine of life cannot be sustained." 

Many able and eminently learned physiologists have 
been disposed to recognize the presence of pre-existing 
" germs " in the earth, but not to the extent of account- 
ing for all life-manifestations therein, as the doctrine is 
conclusively taught in the Bible Genesis. The language 
of this genesis is too clear and explicit to be misunder- 
stood, in its proper renderings. It especially empha- 
sizes the remarkable and most extraordinary statement, 
at least for the period in which it was written, that all 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS, 



39 



life comes primordially from the waters and the earth. 
Note the order in which the command " to bring forth " 
w T as issued : — 

1. Let the earth bring forth its vegetation. 

2. Let the waters bring forth the fishes, the amphibia, 
the reptiles, the fowl of the air. 

3. Let the earth bring forth the beast, the cattle, 
every living creature, and everything that creepeth upon 
the earth — each after his kind. 

4. Let us make man in our own image. 

And this is the precise order in which the Scientific 
genesis proceeds, with all the lithographic pages of nature 
turned back for its inspection. Before vegetation there 
could have been no animal life upon the globe. This fact 
is most conclusively proved, not only by geographic and 
paleontologic records, but by legitimate induction. From 
the highly crystalline, and, for the most part, non-fossilif- 
erous era, far back .in the Laurentian period, down, in the 
order of time, to the modern or post-tertiary period, there 
is one continuous history of life-manifestations, written 
upon the stratified rocks, in the order of the Bible Genesis, 
Was this mere guess and fancy on the part of the writer, 
even to the seemingly improbable element wherein is 
assigned the origin of the " fowl of the air? 5 ' Bear in 
mind that nothing was known of geological distribution 
at the time this most remarkable genesis was written. 
Had there been, it is certain that the careful and pains- 
taking Hesiod, who suffered no important fact of the 



40 TRUE GENESIS. 

Cosmos to escape him, would have given us some hint 
of it in his " Works and Days ; " for Greece was, even in 
his early day, largely the recipient of Phoenician learning 
and literature, as she was certainly Phoenicia's foster-child 
in letters. 

But the more conclusive proofs of the correctness of 
the order of creation, as given in the Bible Genesis, are to 
be found in the accurate observations of modern geo- 
logical science. Before there could have appeared in the 
primeval oceans any living organism, even the lowest 
primordial forms of Crustacea, there must have been ma- 
rine vegetation — that springing from inorganic matter 
and laying the foundation of organic life. Plants origi- 
nate in, and are solely nourished by, inorganic substances ; 
or, to speak more definitely, they originate from primor- 
dial germs — the first elementary principles of life — when- 
ever inorganic conditions favor, and, assimilating air, 
water, and other inorganic materials, convert them into 
organic substances, or such as answer to the conditions of 
organic life. In doing this, they take up and decompose 
carbonic acid, retain the carbon, and give off oxygen. — a 
vital process not known to occur in the case of animal 
life. That their primordial germs, or vital units, are in 
the earth, as the Bible Genesis declares, is conclusively 
shown by the experimental processes first successfully en- 
tered upon by the Abbe Spallanzani, Charles Bonnet, 
and others, and more recently renewed and advocated 
by M. Pasteur, and his co-laborers in super-heated flask ex- 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 4 1 

perimentation, as well as logically established by inductive 
methods. 

Nihil ex niJiilo is conceded to be as conclusive an in- 
duction as omne vivum ex vivo. That is, as without some 
chemical unit — some primary least considered as a whole 
— there can be no chemical action, so without some vital 
unit, in the same primary sense, there can be no vital 
manifestation. The doctrine of " chemical units " is uni- 
versally conceded, and that of " morphological units" 
almost as universally claimed. What greater incongru- 
ity is there, then, in assuming the presence between the 
two of a physiological or vital unit ? * At all events, it is 
as impossible to demonstrate the non-existence of the 
one unit as the other. And so long as legitimate induc- 
tion supports the doctrine of the Bible Genesis, it is use- 
less to indulge in a contrary assumption which is wholly 
without verification or proof. 

But to return to land vegetation. This appeared and 
flourished throughout the Devonian period, if not ante- 
rior to it, and long before the appearance of batrachian 
reptiles and other low air-breathing forms of life. In fact, 

* The existence of vital units is conceded by some of the staunchest ma- 
terialists, such as Herbert Spencer, Professor Bastian and others. Professor 
Bastian says : " The countless myriads of living units which have been 
evolved in different ages of the world's history, must, in each period, have 
given rise to innumerable multitudes of what have been called ' trees of 
life.' " He insists, however, that they have been " evolved " from something, 
or by some unknown process. But we shall show further on that a " unit " 
can neither be evolved nor involved, and that this is as true of vital units 
as of the mathematical or chemical unit. Neither evolution nor involution 
will ever effect the value of a unit. 



42 TRUE GENESIS. 

there cculd have been no life-breathing atmosphere until 
the earlier land vegetation had whipped out its more de- 
structive elements, and paved the way, in necessary con- 
ditions, for the appearance of air-breathing animals. 
Hence the command for the earth to bring forth both 
marine and land vegetation — the vegetation of the earth 
— before there was any similar command respecting 
either marine or land forms of organic life. But by 
what logical method was this exact order inferred in the 
Bible Genesis? Neither the Jews, nor their earlier He- 
brew ancestors, nor the Phoenicians before or after them, 
were in any sense of the word metaphysicians ; nor did 
their language admit of those nicer distinctions and spec- 
ulative conclusions which would have enabled any writer 
using it, thousands of years ago, to draw the command- 
ing induction contained in this remarkable genesis. There 
is nothing in the incomparable methods of M. Comte, or 
the metaphysical spirit of Herbert Spencer, in his most 
daring speculations, which gives the world a more legiti- 
mate and conclusive induction than is contained in this 
simple statement of the order of creation. That it should 
have been a mere piece of guess-work on the part of Moses, 
or any other writer of his time, — covering, as it does, so 
many particularities of statement, all according with the 
exact observations of geologic science, and supported by 
paleontologic records, — requires quite as much credulity 
of judgment as to accept it for divinely inspired truth, 
A disciple of M. Comte might object to this conclusion 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 43 

as susceptible of two interpretations, the one a legiti- 
mate induction, and the other not. But the mind of the 
profounder reasoner would accept the interpretation which 
is supported by the higher reason, and validated by the 
greater number of conclusively-established facts. In the 
case of a strongly intuitive mind, it might be possible 
to guess the exact order of three or four apparently dis- 
connected events, but to arbitrarily associate with them 
other and more distinctively subordinate occurrences, like 
the appearance or disappearance of whole groups and 
classes of plants and animals, the supposition that guess- 
work, and not positive information, governed in the for- 
mation of a judgment, is at once rejected because of its 
utter incredibility. 

It is not our purpose, however, either to affirm or dis- 
affirm the inspirational claims of the Bible Genesis. We 
simply take its language as we find it, stript of its Mas- 
oretic renderings and irrational interpretations, and unhes- 
itatingly aver that the three Hebrew w r ords, translated in 
our common version — " whose seed is in itself upon the 
earth " — contains, when properly rendered, the key that 
unlocks the whole " mystery of life," or, as Dr. Gull 
emphasizes it, " the grand questio vexata of the day." It 
expressly declares that " the primordial germs of all plant- 
life (and, inferentially of all life) are in themselves (t. e. each 
after its kind) upon the earth," and we have only to sup- 
plement this physiological statement with the " necessary 
incidence of conditions/' as formulated by the physicists, 



44 



TRUE GENESIS. 



to explain every phenomenal fact of life hitherto oc- 
curring upon our globe. 

Take all the hints as to the spontaneous origin of life 
to be met with in Aristotle ; all those subsequently re- 
peated by Lucretius and Ovid ; all the experiments of the 
renowned Abbe Spallanzani — all the alleged " fantastic 
assumptions " of M. Bonnet — all the theories of " pan- 
spermism,' , by whomsoever advocated — all the fortuitous 
aggregations of " molecules organiques" as put forth by 
the French school of materialists — all the primordia vi- 
ventium of the gifted Harvey — all the " molecular ma- 
chinery " and " undiscovered correlates of motion " for- 
mulated by Herbert Spencer and Professor Bastian — in 
fine, all the more brilliant theories of life ever spun from 
ithe recesses of the human brain, — and we shall find that 
•they all fit into the three simple Hebrew words to be 
•found in the Bible Genesis, and all are explained by 
.them. We say all, with one exception only — that of 
man. And how inconceivably grand and majestic this 
'exception ! The crowning work of creation was MAN. He 
came from no " muddy vesture of decay ; " no mere life- 
creating fiat spoke him into existence. He who was to 
have " dominion over all the earth " — who was to be cre- 
ated only a little lower than the angels — " in the image of 
God created He him. ,, And, breathing into his nostrils 
the breath of life, he became a living soul ! 

Here is the " bridge " over which the " evolutionist " 
.may pass, if he will, without wearing either the dunce's 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 45 

cap or the ass's ears. It spans the chasm between the 
anthropoid ape and man as no other bridge can span it. 
Across this bridge is flung the living garment of God, 
and how grandly, yet reverently and humbly, did the 
profound Newton cross it ! Oh, ye defiant iconoclasts 
of sublime faith in the " old doctrines ; " ye who talk 
so flippantly of the " potentialities of life in a nebula; " 
who sit on the awe-inspiring Matterhorn, at high noon, 
and muse in sadness over "the primordial formless fog," 
teeming with all the mighty possibilities of myriads of 
sun-systems like our own ; and, musing, sneer, if you can, 
at the idea of a " specific creation " in the beginning — of 
an Infinite Intelligence that directs and superintends all ! 
Because you cannot annihilate matter, nor conceive of its 
annihilation in the infinitessimal compass of your brain, is 
that any reason why Infinite power and intelligence may 
not have spoken it into existence at His sovereign and 
commanding will ? If man would presumptuously press 
towards the threshold of the Infinite, let him do it rever- 
ently, and with humility of spirit, and not as one "that 
vaunteth himself of strength," or " multiplieth words 
without knowledge." 

But let us examine the Bible Genesis a little further 
in this direction. It is said in the second verse of the 
first chapter that "the spirit of God moved upon the 
face of the waters," that is, upon the face of the abyss — 
the chaotic mass at creation — the earth " without form 
and void." 



46 TRUE GENESIS. 

What is here meant by " the spirit of God," is that 
life-giving breath or power of God which operates (con- 
tinuously operates) to impart life to inanimate nature* 
From the connection in which it here stands it means 
this, as in other connections it means the power which 
operates (continuously operates) to produce whatever is 
noble and good (God-like) in man. There is no implication 
in the text that this life-giving principle or power was 
suspended in the act of creation. On the contrary, there 
is abundant evidence in nature to show that it is just as 
operative now as it was in the beginning. One of the 
definitions given by Professor Gibbs of this spirit is, " that 
which operates throughout inanimate nature/' not that 
which once operated, and then forever ceased its opera- 
tions. And Professor Gibbs no doubt meant by " nature," 
in this connection, not only all the physical phenomena 
she presents, but the aggregate or sum total of all her 
phenomena, whether active or passive, animate or inani- 
mate, embracing the world of matter or the world of mind.f 
" All are but parts of one stupendous whole/' — not a part 
nature, and a part not nature. 

Again, in the eleventh verse, it is distinctly declared 

* According to Aristotle, the great world-ordainer is the constant world- 
sustainer. 

\ The definition which Professor Robinson, in his Lexicon of the New 
Testament, gives of the word GTrepfia, as connected with the 4t divine life," 
entirely harmonizes with this view of the subject. He says : " Trop. I John 
3, g, Trag 6 ycyevq^svog kn rov \%ov GTrepfia avrov (deov) ev avrd /uevel i.e. the 
germ or principle of divine life through which he is begotten of God, to 

TCVEV/Lia, 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



47 



that the ZRA. the " germinal principle of life," is in the 
earth, producing each living thing, at least in the vege- 
table world, after its kind, that is, after its own class, or- 
der, genera, species. Hence, the three distinct and sep- 
arate commands given to the earth, or to the earth and 
its waters, " to bring forth." No such command would 
have been given to the earth, had it not first received 
its baptism of life from God — in other words, derived 
the animating principle of life from the source of all 
Life. 

And hence, also, the two separate averments in the sec- 
ond chapter of Genesis, both entirely meaningless apart 
from the construction we here give it, that u out of the 
ground made the Lord God to grow " the vegetation of 
the earth, and " out of the ground " produced he (or caused 
to be produced) every beast of the field, etc., — all of which 
has a definite and comprehensive significance in this 
one sense only, that the animating principle of life is in 
the earth, as the language of this most remarkable gen- 
esis implies. And this seems to have been the patris- 
tic idea, namely, that law and regularity, not arbitrary 
intervention, nor any specific act of creation, were 
what governed in the case of both vegetal and animal 
life. 

St. Augustine says: "In prima institutione naturae 
non quaeritur miraculum, sed quid natura rerum habeat." 
And it is certain that both St. Thomas Aquinas and 
St. Basil held the same view. And they further held 



48 TRUE GENESIS. 

that the animating principle of life once implanted in na- 
ture, held good for all time. But we are not seeking for 
early and mediaeval authority. What we propose to show 
is, that nature is still implicitly obeying just such a law as 
that implied in the command given her " to bring forth," 
however doubtful may be the authority on which it rests, 
in the opinion of our modern scientists. 

And how completely does this genesis of life take man 
out of the definitional formula embracing the " beasts 
of the earth." From the lowest vertebrate, in Mr. Dar- 
win's plexus, to the highest quadrumane (his nearest al- 
lied type to man), covering almost an infinite variety of 
distinct living forms, the distance to be traversed, in order 
to reach man, is hardly more than one-third the length of 
the still unlinked and uncompleted chain. In the average 
capacity of the monkey's brain-chamber, to say nothing 
of his other characteristic differences, the distance is not 
half traversed. As a " beast of the earth," he remains 
allied to his own type, and nothing higher. Both Dar- 
win's vertebral plexus, and Herbert Spencer's " line of indi- 
viduation," must begin with the lancelet and its disputed 
head, and end in the Catarrhine or Old World monkey. 
No a priori induction will ever extend this line ox plexus 
to man. The developmental chain, if indeed there be 
one, has no congenital link that will either drag man down 
to the " beast of the earth," or lift the latter up to the 
transcendent plane of humanity. Each must remain 
specifically in his own type, whatever may be their verti- 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



49 



cal tendencies, upwards or downwards.* And this word 
" type " implies a fundamental ground-plan — an arche- 
type — an original conception of what each should uncon- 
ditionally be, and what plane each should as uncondition- 
ally occupy. Man's place in nature can never be changed 
or modified by materialistic speculations. Whatever the- 
ories the materialists may spin into the unsubstantial 
warp and woof of their scientific formulae respecting life, 
will never stand before the tenacious and stubborn physi- 
ological facts which almost any thoroughly-informed and 
well-read scholar of nature may readily present against 
them. 

Even the wild Indian of our prairies has a more ra- 
tional conception of life and its accountabilities, than 
some of these learned professors whose theoretical con- 
clusions we find it imperative to handle. With all his 
rude, rough nature, hanging like so many mental clogs 
about him, this unlettered savage recognizes the fact that 
the earth is the genetrix omnium viventium, or the living 
mother on whose bosom he shall rest when his spirit has 
passed to the happy hunting-fields beyond. Unlettered 
as he is, and unread in any genesis of life, he fails not to 
perceive that the earth is forever teeming with the ger- 

* Professor Schmidt, of the University of Strasburg, who insists that 
species are only relatively stable, admits that they remain persistent as long 
as they exist under the same external conditions. Time is, therefore, not a 
factor in the mutation of species. Nor are environing conditions factors, 
except as a failure of conditions results in the disappearance of species, as 
the presence of conditions results in their appearance. 



50 TRUE GENESIS. 

minal principles of life, and that when his prairie fires 
have invaded the forests in which he had previously 
hunted the deer, other and different forest growths are 
constantly making their appearance, without any apparent 
intervention of seeds, but not without the supervisional 
care and direction of the Great Spirit, — while many of 
his hardier prairie grasses have disappeared, only to give 
place to the more nutritious gramma coveted by his 
favorite game. 

And here we may as well anticipate an objection which 
will be raised against the presence of this animating prin- 
ciple of life in the earth, as to meet and answer it further on 
in the argument. But as the objection to which we refer 
is one of those dragon's teeth we do not care to leave 
behind us, we will meet it at the very threshold of the con- 
troversy. It will probably be admitted that the vegeta- 
tion of the earth may appear in the way and manner in- 
dicated in the biblical genesis, the same as infusorial 
forms appear in super-heated and hermetically-sealed 
flasks. But how about the preexisting germs or vital 
units of the mastodon, the megatherium, and other gigan- 
tic mammiferous quadrupeds of the Eocene period ? 
From what experimental flasks, in the great laboratory of 
nature, did they first make their appearance? The ob- 
jection is a legitimate one, and we will answer it. 

But first, let us do so from the materialist's own stand- 
point. Time, they all agree, is practically infinite — past 
time, as well as future ; while matter is susceptible of an 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. $i 

infinite number of diverse movements, changes, modifi- 
cations, combinations, etc.,* chemically as well as molecu- 
larly considered. This, they claim, is not a mere hy- 
pothetical judgment, but a mathematically demonstrable 
proposition. Grant it for the sake of the argument, and 
then see if the mastodon does not promptly emerge from 
some one of their " experimental flasks," as they choose 
to put it. 

For if the number of these diverse movements, changes, 
modifications, etc., of matter, have been infinite, in its 
progress from the lowest statical to the highest dynamical 
manifestation, then every possible, as well as conceivable, 
form of matter, must have existed somewhere, and at 
some time, in nature, even to its highest and most poten- 
tially endowed plasmic form in which there is life. And 
if this be true, and the materialists will not deny but 
rather affirm it, then the inter-uterine conditions of mat- 
ter, in the case of all animals (the mastodon included), as 
well as the inter-cellular conditions in the case of all plant- 
life, must have existed, with their necessary environ- 
ments, somewhere and at some time, in the all-hutched 
laboratory of nature. Hence, in the infinite number of 
these changes and combinations — in the countless colloca- 
tions of molecules and chemically changed conditions of 
matter, we have the possibilities of all terrestrial life- 

* Says M. Ch. Bonnet, in his " La Palingenesie Philosophique ; " " II 
est de la plus parfaite evidence que la matiere est susceptible <T une infinite 
de mouvemens divers, et de modifications diverses," and this is the univer- 
sal claim of the materialists. 



52 TRUE GENESIS. 

manifestations, as we have, in the infinite number of 
cosmical changes, the possibilities of all planetary, come- 
tary, and asteroidal manifestations. For whenever these 
vital changes occur, the life-manifestations dependent 
thereon, must as inevitably follow as that infinitely dif- 
used matter should be aggregated by gravity, or by what 
Humboldt calls, in his " Cosmos/' the " world-arranging 
Intelligence " of the universe. 

Who shall say, then, that in that immensely remote 
and long-protracted era — the Eocene period — in which 
the gigantic elephantoids first made their appearance, 
there did not exist somewhere, in some one of nature's 
more cunning and prolific recesses, the exact plasmic 
conditions necessary for the appearance of the mastodon ? 
If they existed anywhere (which is concessively possible), 
with the necessary environment (also concessively possi- 
ble), then the mastodon could no more help wallowing 
out of his essential plasma than the earth can help re- 
sponding to its axial motion. All things are framed in 
the prodigality of nature, and she never commits an 
abortion upon herself. If both the conditions and neces- 
sary environment were at any time present, as they must 
have been on the materialistic theory, the mastodon is 
just as easily accounted for as the first fungus, or the 
first fungus-spore.* 

* Professor Burdach (as trad, par Jourdan), in speaking of the produc- 
tive power of nature, says, u Limitee quant a 1' etendue de ses manifestations, 
elle continue toujours d' agir pour la conservation de ce qui a ete cree, et, 
quoiqu' elle ne maintenue les formes organiques superieures que par la seule 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



53 



All physicists, as well as physiologists, agree that in- 
dividual species of both plants and animals have disap- 
peared from the earth for the want of the " necessary con- 
ditions " under which they once lived and flourished. 
What greater fallacy is there, then, in the assumption 
that they originally appeared from the presence of these 
identical conditions, whatever they may have been, and 
whenever they may have occurred ? We put this ques- 
tion not simply because the Bible Genesis asserts that 
" out of the ground made the Lord God to grow ,? every 
plant of the field " before it was in the earth, " as well as 
every herb of the field " before it grew ; " nor because it 
declares that their primordial germs are in the earth ; nor 
because it speaks of the earth as containing within itself 
the " animating principle of life." But we put it on the 
irrefragable logic of the materialist's own premises and con- 
clusions. They may use other and different physiological 
terms from what we should care to employ, but their 
" correlates of motion," their " molecular force," their 
" highly differentiated life-stuff," etc., may possibly mean 
nothing more than what we mean by " vital units," 
" vital forces/' " vital conditions," etc. Their preference 

propagation, il ne repugne point au bon sens de penser qu* aujourd' hui en- 
core elle a la puissance de produire les formes inferieures avec des elements 
heterogenes, comme elle a cree originairement tout ce qui possede 1' organi- 
sation." This shows that its author believed in the possibility of the 
" superior organic forms," like the mastodon, megatherium, etc.. from the 
" heterogenetic elements ' — those undergoing every conceivable change — 
as well as the " inferior forms." At all events, it is a legitimate induction 
from materialistic premises. 



54 TRUE GENESIS. 

for the terms they employ, over essential " qualities " or 
" properties" of matter, is entirely due to the obvious in- 
validity of their conclusions, except as their physical 
theory of life may help them out of an unpleasant 
dilemma. " Force " is a more convenient term on which 
to allege the de novo origin of life — its spontaneous mani- 
festation in their experimental flasks — than any vital prin- 
ciple primarily inhering in matter, and manifesting itself 
whenever conditions favor. It is to validate their own 
reasoning that they construct their fallacious force- 
premises, from which to draw their materialistic induc- 
tions. In other words, theirs is the fallacy oinon causa pro 
causa, or that vicious process of reasoning which alleges 
some other than the real cause of vital manifestation, 
and fastens induction where none is legitimately inferable. 
Burdach, Buffon, Pouchet, Needham, and other pro- 
fessed vitalists, agree that in all life-manifestations there 
must be some preexisting vital force or principle, without 
which no living thing, whether plant or animal, can come 
into existence.* M. Pouchet says : " I have always thought 
that organized beings were animated by forces which are 
in no way reducible to physical or chemical forces. ,, The 
Abbe Needham is satisfied to formulate a " force vegeta- 
tive," so far as plant-life is concerned ; Buffon invariably 

* This point is conclusively made by Professor Burdach, who says (we 
quote from Jourdan) ; " La tendance interieure a la configuration existe 
avant sa manifestation." And by his tendance interieure he must mean some 
vital or other law, equivalent to an entia in matter, which results in, not 
from manifestation. 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 55 

falls back on vital force or energy ; and Burdach on a 
" force plastique," which is essentially inseparable from 
nature in her vital manifestations. According to the 
latter, the whole universe is an " organisme absolu" con- 
stantly endowed with life, and giving expression to it in 
all conceivable directions. And all that these vitalists 
need, to give a full interpretation to their facts of observa- 
tion, is to supplement their theories with the Bible decla- 
ration that the animating principle of life is in the earth, 
from which all living things make their appearance, each 
distinctively after its own kind, whenever environing condi- 
tions favor. For they severally recognize these " necessary 
conditions " as inseparable from all vital manifestation. 

An effort has been made to show that Goethe was the 
great inspired prophet of the doctrine of " Evolution, " as 
a ceaselessly progressive transformation of one thing into 
another, in the metamorphoses of plants and animals ; 
and Haeckel quotes this passage from him as entirely con- 
clusive of this point : " Thus much we should have gained 
(towards solving the problem of life) that all the more 
perfect organic beings, among which we include fishes, 
amphibians, birds, mammals (and at the head of the lat- 
ter, man), to be formed according to an archetype,* which 
merely fluctuates more or less in its ever persistent parts, 

* Goethe borrowed his idea of an archetypal world from Plato and the 
Eleatic school. They held that the world was originated, and not eternal ; 
that it was framed by' the Creator after a perfect archetype, one eternally 
existing in the divine mind, if not an actual soul-world of which our own 
is but the reflex. 



56 TRUE GENESIS. 

and moreover, day by day, completes and transforms 
itself by means of reproduction." But this attempt to 
give a poetic glorification to Haeckelism in Goethe's 
speculations, and bring his commanding name into sup- 
port of the evolution theory of development, will prove 
utterly futile in the light of his " archetype, " and the per- 
sistency with which he concedes that nature adheres to 
perfected forms. 

Goethe accepts the doctrine of vis centripeta, beyond 
the influence of which no developmental progress can be 
made in the way of diversifying or variegating ideal types. 
In other words, he virtually fixes limits to variability, 
from the outermost circumference of which reversion 
must inevitably take place. His whole doctrine may be 
summed up generally, if not specially, in these words: 
" The animal is fashioned by circumstances to circum- 
stances," as the eagle to the air and mountain top, the 
mole to the loose soil in which it burrows, the seal to the 
water in which he frolics, and the bat to the cave, the 
twilight, and the night air. We should rather say that 
the animal is fashioned, after the Great Architect's 
pattern, to circumstances, and is only varied by circum- 
stances, and that within the narrowest limits of variability. 
For the most that Goethe means by his " archetype " is 
an ideal pattern, after which, or on which, a natural group 
of plants or animals has been fashioned within the limits 
of possible variability. But by whose mind, or rather 
within whose mind, was this ideal pattern — this essential 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



57 



archetype — fashioned? Whence this ideal type, this 
natural group, this Archeus pervading all nature and 
fashioning all organic matter? Not from the mind of 
Goethe certainly, nor from that of Aristotle or Lucre- 
tius, but from the one supreme mind of the universe, in 
which the groups of all living things were originally fash- 
ioned in the archetypal world — that world " which, " ac- 
cording to Bolingbroke, " contains intelligibly all that is 
contained sensibly in our world." 

This archetypal doctrine of Goethe, coupled, as he 
couples it, with the influences of environment, or nec- 
essary external conditions, with typical modifications 
only, while it entirely harmonizes with the Bible genesis 
of types (everything modeled after its kind), is far from 
aiding, or in any way abetting, the materialistic hypothe- 
sis of Haeckel, unless we make nature at once the creator 
and modifier of her own archetype. And even then the 
variability of species remains unaccounted for, except as 
we attribute to nature a purpose to modify persistent 
forms under a law that is immutable even in its variability. 
For the assumption of an archetype carries with it an 
archetypal plan and purpose, with a degree of intelligence, 
either in or above nature, capable at once of conceiving 
the type and determining the limits of its variability. The 
question is not, therefore, as many may seem to think, 
whether species originate by miracle or by law, but 
whether laws and causes can exist independently of any 
predetermining will or agency in the universe. 



58 TRUE GENESIS. 

Our language, and that of all civilized peoples on the 
globe, must be thoroughly recast, not only in its philologi- 
cal and etymological character, but in its ideologic, eti- 
ologic, and other significations, before we can successfully 
fall back on an antecedent cause without an effect, or an 
effect without an antecedent cause. Besides, the human 
mind would have to undergo as complete a subversion of 
structure as language itself, before any such attempt at 
recasting it, on the basis of modern materialistic ideas, 
could possibly prove successful. And then, at least one- 
third of our language would have to disappear in this 
iconoclastic reform. For instance, take any well-tabulated 
synopsis of our categories and their relations, and they 
would nearly all have to be recast or entirely abandoned. 
Time, space, matter, motion, intellect, abstract ideas, 
volitions, affections, etc., with their several correlates or 
co-relations, would all have to undergo a thorough recast- 
ing process. The personal, intersocial, sympathetic, 
moral, and religious relations and obligations, would have 
to be summarily set aside for future revision, if not for 
sweeping rejection. All our ideas of life, materiality, 
spirituality, animality, vegetability, sensibility, etc., would 
have to fall into greater or less desuetude, the language 
disappearing with the ideas. All the words expressing 
our ideas of a superhuman agency, of God, angels, heaven, 
revelation, religious doctrines, sentiments, acts of wor- 
ship, piety, human accountability to divine institutions, 
rites, ceremonies, etc., — to say nothing of maleficent 



LIFE— ITS TRUE GENESIS. 



59 



spirits, mythological and other fabulous divinities, enter- 
ing so largely into the spirit and machinery of all our 
best poetry — would utterly disappear from our language. 
All our churches, minsters, chapels, tabernacles, cathe- 
drals, and temples erected to the " living God, " embracing 
the finest and most majestic architecture of the world, 
would have to succumb to the iconoclastic zeal of these 
materialistic reformers. The ten categories of Aristotle 
would disappear in the one category of Haeckel, or possi- 
bly the two categories of Bastian — Matter and Motion ! 
Philologically speaking, we should all be at sea, drifting, 
like a set of deaf-mutes, on a wide and inaudible ocean — 
all inarticulate, tongue-tied, voiceless — with only the 
screeching of the sea-mew, or some other sepulchral bird 
of the night, to greet us as in wide-mouthed derision of 
our speechlessness and folly. 

But let us see how the incontestible facts of nature, 
and the truths of science, fit into the three simple Hebrew 
words referring to " germs, " or the germinal principle of 
life, instead of the natural " seeds " of plants or trees. We 
have given what we claim to be the true rendering of 
these words. To show how perfectly they harmonize 
with all the phenomenal manifestations of life in nature, 
we hurriedly pass to our third chapter. 



CHAPTER III. 

ALTERNATIONS OF FOREST GROWTHS. 

^TO fact has more profoundly puzzled the vegetable 
^ physiologist than the alternations of forest growths 
which are everywhere occurring without the apparent in- 
terposition of natural seeds, and which have been con- 
sidered as wholly inexplicable except as one unsatisfactory 
theory after another has been suggested to account for 
the wide dissemination and distribution of their seeds. 
We have had any number of these theories, more or less 
ingeniously constructed, but it is safe to say that none of 
them satisfactorily accounts for more than a very limited 
number of the phenomena presented. It is only within 
a comparatively recent period that these alternations of 
timber growth have attracted the attention of scientific 
men ; consequently little more than crude suggestions 
and ill-digested facts are at the command of the general 
reader and writer. And yet the facts themselves, such 
as they are, would fill a dozen volumes of the size of Dr. 
Hough's recent " Report upon American Forestry/' 
We can only give a few of the more important facts we 
have gathered, and many of these are so deficient in 
necessary detail that their value is greatly lessened for 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO IVTJ/S. fa 

scientific uses. This is especially true of nearly all those 
noticed and collated by Dr. Hough, in his report to the 
United States Commissioner of Agriculture, made in 1877, 
in which the alternations in question are referred to at 
length, but no new suggestions presented, nor any very 
important new facts given. 

If our construction of the Bible genesis be the correct 
one, it will, we think, be unhesitatingly admitted that all 
the facts collected and collated by Dr. Hough, together 
with others more carefully noticed by our ablest writers 
on vegetable physiology, not only harmonize with this 
ancient Hebrew text, but so completely fit into it, both 
in its implications and explications, that adverse criticism 
will be awed into silence rather than provoked into any 
new controversy on the subject. This remarkable gene- 
sis declares that the germs of all living things are in 
themselves upon the earth — " upon the face of all the 
earth." It is true that this declaration, as contained in 
the nth verse of the first chapter of Genesis, is textually 
limited to the vegetation of the earth ; but the further 
emphatic statement that " the animating principle of 
life" is in the earth, coupled with the more substantive 
fact that God commanded the waters and the earth to 
bring forth abundantly of every living creature, with the 
single exception of man, conclusively extends the lan- 
guage of the nth verse to whatever vegetable and animal 
life the earth was specifically directed to " bring forth." 
It is our purpose to consider, in this connection, not only 



62 TRUE GENESIS. 

the various facts noticed and theories suggested by our 
ablest writers and thinkers on the subject of seed- 
distribution, but to ascertain, as far as possible, to what 
extent their several facts and theories harmonize with 
natural phenomena, and at the same time determine 
what disposition should be made of them in the light of 
this new genesis, herein for the first time disclosed. 

Professor George P. Marsh, in his work on " Man and 
Nature," in which he treats largely of forestry in Europe, 
says that " w T hen a forest old enough to have witnessed 
the mysteries of the Druids is felled, trees of other 
species spring up in its place ; and when they, in their 
turn, fall before the axe, sometimes even as soon as they 
have spread their protecting shade over the surface, the 
germs which their predecessors had shed, perhaps centu- 
ries before, sprout up, and in due time, if not choked by 
other trees belonging to a later stage in the order of 
natural succession, restore again the original wood. In 
these cases, the seeds of the new crop may have been 
brought by the wind, by birds, by quadrupeds, or by 
other causes; but, in many instances, this explanation is 
not probable" It is manifest that Professor Marsh uses 
the word " germs," in this connection, in the sense of 
seeds only; for no seed-bearing trees " shed " any other 
germs than the natural seeds they bear. And while he 
admits that, in many instances, the generally accepted 
theory concerning the dissemination of seeds is not a 
probable one, he still clings to the exploded notion that 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 63 

vegetable physiology furnishes a record of " numerous 
instances where seeds have grown after lying dormant 
for ages in the earth." He further says, in the same 
connection, that " their vitality seems almost imperisha- 
ble while they remain in the situations in which nature 
deposits them ; n although he is reluctant to accept the 
accounts of " the growth of seeds which had lain for ages 
in the ashy dryness of the Egyptian catacombs/' believ- 
ing that they should be received with great caution, if not 
rejected altogether. But why he should scruple about 
receiving these speculative accounts of ancient Egyptian 
cereals, which are sometimes hawked about the country 
for two and three dollars a seed, and, in the same breath, 
accept the absurder theory that seeds may lie dormant 
for ages in soils where the hardest and most enduring 
woods will utterly perish and disappear in a few brief 
years, is wholly inexplicable to us, except as an hypothe- 
sis to force a conclusion, or to account for the otherwise 
unaccountable alternations of forest growths. 

But the idea that nature has any cunning devices by 
which she may hide seeds away where they will remain 
" almost imperishable " for ages, is not entirely new with 
Professor Marsh, nor is it any suggestion that would be 
protected by copyright. In finding the winds, birds, 
quadrupeds, and other assumed agencies of distribution 
improbable, he seeks, with Dr. Dwight, for " the seeds of 
an ancient vegetation," and, finding none by actual ob- 
servation, concludes that nature has some occult, and thor- 



64 TRUE GENESIS. 

oughly surreptitious, method of hiding them away, even 
in soils below the last glacial drift, where no microscope 
can possibly reach them. As the accounts of seeds taken 
from the mummy-cases of Egypt may answer the pur- 
poses of those seeking to palm off some new cereal as a 
nine-days wonder on the ignorant, so these speculations 
about the indestructibility of seeds, when hidden away by 
nature, may answer a like purpose in imposing upon the 
over-credulous ; but they will hardly be accepted by the 
intelligent, much less the scientific, in the light of all the 
facts herein given. The simple truth is that all seeds are 
speedily perishable by out-door exposure. We hardly 
know a single seed that will survive beyond the second 
year when subjected to such exposure. If they do not 
germinate the first year, their vitality is utterly gone the 
second year, as hopelessly so as if they had been cast into 
the fire and consumed to ashes. 

But there is a large class of vegetable phenomena 
which wholly excludes, the idea of this wonderful vitality 
of seeds. It is well known that soil brought up from deep 
wells and other excavations, often produces plants entirely 
unlike the prevailing local flora. This soil has been 
brought up, in many instances, from beneath the last 
glacial drift, where it must have remained for not less 
than a quarter of a million years at the lowest calculation, 
and may have remained for millions of years, if not 
longer; and yet the same singular phenomenon is pre- 
sented. Exposed to the sun's rays, and the fructifying 



ALTERNA TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 65 

influences of showers and dews, the soil burgeons forth 
into an independent flora, and such as are nowhere to be 
found in the surrounding locality. The writer, in digging 
a well in Waukesha, Wis., — a place now famous for the 
curative properties of its waters — in 1847, struck soil at a 
depth of about thirty-five feet — that which was evidently 
ante-glacial. The place is some twenty miles back from 
Milwaukee, and the whole section, far into the interior of 
the state from Lake Michigan, is one of drift, covering the 
primeval soil at various depths, from a few feet up to a 
hundred or more ; and the imbedded soil must have re- 
mained in its place for untold ages. And yet, it was no 
sooner brought to the surface than it produced several 
small plants that were wholly unlike the prevailing local 
flora ; although, unfortunately, they did not sufficiently 
mature to enable us to determine their genera and 
species. Considerable portions of this soil were dried and 
subjected by us, and the late Dr. John A. Savage, then 
president of Carroll College, to -microscopic examination, 
but without discovering the slightest trace of any seed, 
or anything resembling seed, in the several portions care- 
fully examined. The soil, however, contained, in its im- 
bedded place, several large Norway spruce logs, in a more 
or less perfect state of preservation. But there were no 
cones, nor chits to cones, to be found in it, although the 
most rigid examination was made at the time to discover 
them. That the seeds of these delicate little plants 
should have survived the wreck of this ancient Norwe- 



66 TRUE GENESIS. 

gian forest, or the drift from one, and burst forth into 
newness of life after hundreds of thousands, not to say 
millions of years, is decidedly too large a draft upon our 
credulity to be honored " without sight." But we will 
return to the alternations of forest growths. 

It is within a comparatively recent period that exten- 
sive areas of hemlock, in Greene and Ulster Counties, 
N. Y., were cut off to supply the neighboring tanneries 
with bark. These clearings were no sooner made than 
oak, chestnut, birch, and other trees of deciduous foliage, 
sprang up and entirely usurped the place of the hemlock ; 
for the reason, no doubt, that the soil had become chemi- 
cally unbalanced for the growth of the latter, while its 
condition was entirely favorable for the development of 
the " germs M (not the natural seed) of the former. These 
changes in timber growths have been widely noticed in 
all parts of this country, as well as in Europe, but the 
universal supposition has been that they came from the 
natural seeds of their respective localities, those either 
scattered by the winds, or borne thither by the birds, by 
quadrupeds, or by some other natural agency. No one 
has suggested the theory of " primordial germs " or " vital 
units," or come any nearer to it than Dr. Dwight did in 
suggesting " the seeds of an ancient vegetation." The 
great truth of the Bible genesis has been wholly over- 
looked by reason of a faulty translation in the first in- 
stance, as taken from the Masoretic renderings of the 
sixth century, and implicitly followed since. 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 6j 

In 1845, a violent tornado swept a wide strip of forest 
in Northern New York, from the more thickly settled 
portions of Jefferson County to Lake Champlain. The 
timber that succumbed to the force of the tornado, and 
growing at various points along its track, was mainly 
beech, maple, birch, ash, hemlock, spruce, etc. ; but it 
was rarely replaced, at any point, by the same timber, 
in the growths that almost immediately followed. The 
trees that are now growing along the track of the tor- 
nado are principally poplar, cherry, birch, and a little 
beech and ironwood : no ash, maple, spruce, or hemlock, 
except here and there, at considerable intervals, a tree or 
two which may have been replaced by natural seed. 
The important fact noticeable, in this connection, is that 
the aggressive timber — that replacing the old — entirely 
usurped the place of the evergreen growths, supplanting 
them with those that were wholly deciduous. Besides, 
it does not appear that the poplar, the cherry, and the 
ironwood, which were altogether aggressive, previously 
grew near enough to the track of the tornado to have 
possibly supplied the seed necessary for their appearance 
and growth. 

The fact was specially noticeable at the time, and has 
been widely communicated since, that the white oak 
timber cut off at Valley Forge for fuel and other army 
purposes in the American camp, in the winter of 1777-78, 
was succeeded by black oak, hickory, chestnut, etc. — the 
white oak entirely disappearing, although by far the most 



68 TRUE GENESIS. 

favorably situated for propagation by seed. But the 
alternations of forest growths had attracted too little at- 
tention at that time to render the meagre facts given of 
any special value to scientific men. If the usurping tim- 
ber had grown in the immediate neighborhood (a fact not 
stated), it might have come from natural seeds, and not 
from primordial germs under " favoring conditions." 

In the Ohio Agricultural Report of 1872, an account 
is given of a storm-track, in that state, which swept for a 
considerable distance, and was violent enough to bear 
down all the timber before it. It is stated that the path 
of this tornado (which must have occurred many years 
ago) " had grown up with black-walnut, another and 
different growth from that prostrated by the force of the 
storm." In this instance, there were no neighboring 
trees, except perhaps at distant intervals, from which the 
nuts of the black-walnut could have been derived, unless 
they had been promiscuously strewn by the tornado along 
its entire track. But it is, unfortunately, not stated that 
the tornado occurred at that opportune season of the 
year when the nuts were properly matured for planting. 

In many parts of the United States, particularly in 
the South and West, the paths of local tornadoes — those 
sweeping the native forests long before the axe of civili- 
zation invaded them — may still be traced by the alterna- 
tions of timber growths, extending for long distances, and 
through forests where there were no neighboring trees 
from which it was possible that their seeds could have 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 69 

been derived. One of these tornadoes the writer traced 
many years ago (as early as 1837) in South Alabama, 
and he is satisfied, both from observation and reading, 
that the instances are rare, if not altogether exceptional, 
where the clean path of a tornado, through any of our 
primitive forests, has been succeeded by the same growth 
of timber as that borne down by the winds. Where 
the path of this ancient tornado of Alabama swept 
through a pine forest, a clean growth of oak was but- 
tressed on either side by pine ; and vice versa, where it 
swept an oak forest. And it is certain that the tornado, 
whenever it may have occurred, could have exhibited no 
such discriminating freak as alternately to distribute 
acorns in pine growths, and pine cones in oak growths, 
either to make good a scientific theory or balk an un- 
scientific one. 

Professor Agassiz, in passing through a dense young 
spruce forest some years ago, on the south shore of Lake 
Superior, noticed that the ground was thickly strewn with 
fallen birch trunks, showing that their place had been but 
recently usurped by the spruce ; and he supposed that 
the birch had first succumbed to the force of the winds, 
and the spruce promptly taken its place, since, as a general 
rule, an evergreen growth succeeds a deciduous, and vice 
versa. We have any number of well authenticated facts 
similar to this stated by Professor Agassiz, but we cannot 
give place to them, in this connection, without greatly 
exceeding our limits. 



70 TRUE GENESIS. 

Dr. Franklin B. Hough, in his recent " Report upon 
American Forestry/' to which we have already referred, 
says : " It is not unusual to observe in the swamps of the 
northern states, an alternation of growth taking place 
without human agency. Extensive tracts of tamarack 
(Larix Americana) may be seen in northern Wisconsin 
that are dying out, and being succeeded by the balsam 
fir {Abies balsameci), which may be probably caused by 
the partial drainage of the swamps, from the decay or 
removal of a fallen tree that had obstructed the outlet." 
The writer of this work resided for a period of ten years 
or more in Wisconsin, and during that time traversed 
extensive portions of its territory, both before and after 
it became a state. As early as 1844, the extensive tama- 
rack swamps of that region were manifestly dying out for 
the want of the proper nutritious elements in the soil, 
and the balsam fir rapidly taking its place, especially 
where the accumulations of soil, resulting from decayed 
vegetation, were favorable for its appearance. The drain- 
age of the swamps had not been thought of at that time, 
nor had the swamps themselves been disposed of, to any 
considerable extent, by the federal government. They 
were subsequently granted to the state for educational 
purposes, and afterwards purchased up in the interest of 
speculative parties. 

But the decay of the tamarack had really commenced 
long before population found its way, in any considerable 
numbers, into that section of the country ; and the 



AL TERXA T10XS OF FOREST GEO WTHS. 7 1 

balsam fir had begun its usurpation, in many of the 
swamps, long prior to the advent there of the white 
man. Neither artificial drainage, nor accidental drainage, 
had anything to do with the appearance of the balsam 
fir, or the disappearance of the tamarack. The latter 
was manifestly dying out for the want of the proper 
nutriment, and the former coming in for the reason that 
the soil was chemically balanced for the development of 
its " primordial germs " — those everywhere implanted in 
the earth, to await the necessary conditions for their de- 
velopment and growth. The natural seeds of this balsam 
fir were not present in either the first, second, or third 
tamarack swamp in which this alternation of growth origi- 
nally took place. The change commenced as soon as 
conditions favored, and not before. It is safe to say 
that, in none of these tamarack swamps, was there a single 
balsam fir cone, or a single chit to a cone, nor had there 
probably been for thousands of years, before the time 
when the first balsam fir made its appearance in that 
section. They came, as all primordial forests come, from 
germs, not from the seeds of trees. Universally, the 
germ precedes the tree, as the tree precedes the seed, in 
all vegetal growths, from the lowest cryptogam to the 
lordliest conifer of the Pacific slope. Otherwise, we 
should be logically driven back to an act of " specific 
creation," which the materialist stoutly rejects, and the 
Bible genesis nowhere affirms. 

Mr. George B. Emerson, in his valuable work on the 



72 TRUE GENESIS. 

" Trees and Shrubs of Massachusetts," suggests as a 
cause (undoubtedly the true one) for the dying out of old 
forests, "the exhaustion of the nutritious elements of the 
soil required for their vigorous and successful growth." 
But he is evidently at fault in his speculations as to the 
alternations of forest growths. The Cretan labyrinth 
that everywhere confronts him is the " seed-theory," 
which is so inextricable to him that he constantly stum- 
bles, as one scientifically blind, yet eager to lead the blind. 
All the phenomenal facts with which he deals admirably 
fit into the Bible genesis, but he fails to see it because 
the sublime truth (with him) lies locked up in an unmean- 
ing translation. He is indefatigable, however, in his hunt 
after seeds where there are no seeds, and in his jumps at 
conclusions where there are manifestly no data to justify 
them. 

He says: "Nature points out in various ways, and 
the observation of practical men has almost uniformly 
confirmed the conclusion to which the philosophical 
botanist has come from theoretical considerations, that a 
rotation of crops is as important in the forests as in the 
cultivated fields." And he supplements this statement 
(measurably a true one) by adding that "a pine forest is 
often, without the agency of man, succeeded by an oak* 
forest, where there were a few oaks previously scattered 
through the woods to furnish seedy This is a very 
cautious, as well as circumspect, statement ; but one that 
Mr. Emerson would not have made, had his experience 



ALTERNATIONS OF FOREST GROWTHS. 



73 



and observation been that of Professor Agassiz, Profes- 
sor Marsh, and others we might name. His few oaks 
previously scattered through the woods are no doubt 
among the " theoretical considerations " taken into ac- 
count by him, as a philosophical botanist rather than a 
practical one. They were necessary for the extreme cau- 
tion with which he would state a proposition when its 
" conditioning facts " were not fully known by him. His 
anxiety to account for the appearance of an oak forest in 
the place of a pine, where the latter had been cut off, 
was commendable enough to justify him in a pretty broad 
supposition, but not in any such general statement as he 
here makes. Had he consulted any of the older inhabi- 
tants of Westford, Littleton, and adjoining towns, in his 
own state, he would have found that not a few oak forests 
had succeeded the pine without the intervention of 
" scattered oaks," or even scattered acorns, in the locali- 
ties named. Nor would his " squirrel-theory " of distribu- 
tion have been very confidently adhered to, fifty years 
ago, in localties where the shagbark walnut was almost as 
abundant as the white oak itself. No squirrel will gather 
acorns where he can possibly get hickory nuts, and few will 
gather hickory nuts where the larger and thinner-shelled 
walnuts are to be had for the picking. The squirrel is pro- 
vident, but no more so than he is fastidious in the choice 
of his food. He never plants acorns except for his own 
gratification, and is never gratified with indifferent food 
so long as he can command that which is to his liking. 



74 



TRUE GENESIS. 



In further speaking of the " exhausted elements " of 
the soil — those necessary for the food of trees as well as 
plants, and without which they inevitably perish and dis- 
appear — Mr. Emerson says ; " This is clearly indicated in 
what is constantly going on in the forests, particularly the 
fact which I have already stated, and which is abundantly 
confirmed by my correspondents, that a forest of one 
kind is frequently succeeded by a spontaneous growth of 
trees of another kind." In the sense in which he mani- 
festly uses the term " spontaneous " in this connection, 
his new forest might be accounted for on the theory of 
" primordial germs," but not on that of " seeds ; " for few 
trees or shrubs in Massachusetts bear winged seeds, or 
possess any other means of dispersion (the Acer family 
excepted) than those common to our general forest 
growths. Spontaneity, in a strictly scientific sense, is not 
predicable upon the artificial or chance sowing of either 
acorns, hickory nuts, or the chits to pine cones. A spon- 
taneous growth implies a process which is neither usual 
nor accidental — a growth without external cause, but 
from inherent natural tendency — and it is questionable 
whether there is any such process in nature. It belongs 
to the same class of idle speculations as " spontaneous 
generation " in the infusorial world — a subject that will 
be considered as we advance in this work. 

Our vegetable physiologists, Mr. Emerson among the 
number, are simply unfortunate in their use of terms — 
those expressing even the commonest operations of 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTIIS. 7 5 

nature. In their genesis of plants and trees they need to 
adhere a little more closely to the genesis of induction, 
and use language in harmony with the phenomenal facts 
and characteristics which they are called upon to explain. 
But Mr. Emerson was not alone at fault in this almost 
universal slip of the scientific pen. He quotes from a let- 
ter of Mr. P. Sanderson, of East Whately, Mass., in which 
the writer says : " There is an instance on my farm of 
spruce and hackmatack being succeeded by a spontaneous 
growth of maple wood ; " and he adds that " instances are 
also mentioned by him (Mr. Sanderson) of beech and 
maple succeeding oaks ; oaks following pines, and the 
reverse ; hemlock succeeded by white birch in cold places, 
and by hard maple in warm ones ; beech succeeded by 
maple, elm, etc ; and, in fact, the occurrence was so com- 
mon that surprise was expressed at the asking of the 
question.'* 

These several alternations in timber growths, effec- 
tually vouched for by Mr. Emerson, occurring " spontane- 
ously " as stated, can hardly be accounted for on any 
other theory than the presence of " germs " , nd " favor- 
ing conditions," such as we have named in connection with 
the Bible genesis. They might possibly be explained on 
the theory of " scattered seeds," if the several growths 
had made their appearance gradually, and not " spontane- 
ously," as stated. The misfortune with Mr. Emerson, as 
well as with his several " reliable correspondents," was, 
that his facts are too meagrely imparted, in the neces- 



7 6 



TRUE GEXESIS. 



sary details, to draw any satisfactory conclusions from 
them — such as the nearness or distance of surrounding 
trees of the same species, and the possible chances of 
their seeds taking lodgment in the soil from which they 
grew. But, fortunately, there are facts, and those abund- 
antly substantiated, which entirely negative the presence 
of seeds in the soils where these " spontaneous growths " 
are said to have appeared. In some instances, they cover 
large tracts of land, at distances of thirty, forty, fifty, and 
even hundreds of miles, from any native forest from which 
seed could have been derived. 

Dr. Dwight, in the second volume of his " Travels," 
mentions visiting a town in Vermont (Panton, near Ver- 
gennes), in which a piece of land that had been once culti- 
vated, but was afterwards permitted to lie waste, " yielded 
a thick and vigorous growth of hickory, where there was 
?iot a single hickory tree in a?ty original forest within fifty 
miles of the place." Of this piece of land he says : " The 
native growth here was white pine, of which I did not see 
a single stem in the whole grove of hickory. " He is 
greatly puzzled to account for this isolated growth of 
hickory, but readily concludes that " the fruit was too 
heavy to be carried fifty miles by birds; besides" he 
adds, " it is not eaten by any bird indigenous to Vermont." 
And even if the birds had carried the nuts thither, not 
one of them could have been planted there unless the nut- 
eating bird had been caught and destroyed on the spot, 
.and the nut released from its crop. This might account 



ALTERNATIONS OF FOREST GROWTHS. yy 

k 

for the appearance of a single tree, but not for a " whole 
grove of hickory ; " and the squirrels certainly could not 
have been provident enough to plant any considerable 
grove in this particular locality, and nowhere else within 
fifty miles of it. The winds could not have borne them 
that distance without dropping a single nut by the way, 
and there is only one supposition left, which is that indi- 
cated in the Bible genesis. 

While Dr. Dwight emphatically rejects the " transpor- 
tation theory," he imagined he had solved the difficulty 
in his suggestion " that the cultivation of the land had 
brought up the seeds of a former forest, within the limits 
of vegetation, and given them an opportunity to vegetate." 
But the utter absurdity of this theory may be demon- 
strated by any one inside of twa years, by placing hickory 
nuts, in different soils, at a depth to which an ordinary 
plough-point would reach in cultivation ; and then, at the 
end of the second year, examining those that did not 
germinate the first year. The commonest observer of 
a hickory forest knows that if the fallen nuts do not 
germinate the first year, their vitality is utterly and 
hopelessly gone. It makes no difference whether you 
leave the nuts on the ground where they fall, or place 
them one inch or twenty inches beneath the soil, the 
result will be the same. At the end of two years, you can 
pulverize them b&tween*thumb and finger almost as easily 
as so much dried loam. The idea of deriving a new forest 
from such nuts, is hardly less absurd than that of empty- 



78 TRUE GENESIS. 

ing the Egyptian catacombs of their old mummy-cases, in 
the expectation of seeing a race of Theban kings stalking 
the earth as before the foundations of either Carthage or 
Rome were laid. 

Dr. Dwight was a very close and accurate observer of 
nature, and suffered few of even the minor points of detail 
to escape him. In the same work, as well as in the same 
connection, he gives an account of another forest, which 
he supposes sprang spontaneously from " the seeds of an 
ancient vegetation. " He says : " A field about five miles 
from Northampton (Mass.), on an eminence called i Rail 
Hill/ was cultivated about a century ago {circiter 1720). 
The native growth here, and in all the surrounding region, 
was wholly oak, chestnut, etc. As the field belonged to 
my grandfather, I had the best opportunity of learning its 
history. Tt contained about five acres, in the form of an 
irregular parallelogram. As the savages rendered the 
cultivation dangerous, it was given up. On this ground 
there sprang up a grove of white pines, covering the field 
and retaining its figure exactly. So far as I remember, 
there was not in it a single oak or chestnut tree ; " and he 
adds, " tliere was not a single pine zvhose seeds were, or, 
probably, had for ages been, sufficiently near to have been 
planted on this spot." He supposes, however, that the 
" seeds " (pine cone chits) had lain dormant for ages 
before cultivation brought them up " within the limits 
of vegetation/' 

As early as 1807, Judge Peters, of Philadelphia, be- 



ALTERNATIONS OF FOREST GROWTHS. 



79 



came satisfied that all that elevated region around the 
head waters of the Delaware, Alleghany, and Genesee 
Rivers, then covered with heavy growths of hemlock, or 
with forests of beech and sugar-maple, was originally an 
oak forest, probably covering most of that entire region. 
And Mr. John Adlum, of Havre de Grace, Md., who 
originally surveyed the lands south of the great bend of 
the Susquehanna, between that river and the Delaware, 
conceived the same idea as early as 1788. The section 
surveyed by him was chiefly covered with beech and 
sugar-maple ; in fact, it was in what was called, at the 
time, " the beech and sugar-maple country/' He drew 
his inferences from the fact that he found, here and there, 
at irregular intervals, red and white oaks growing to an 
enormous size, none being less than sixteen feet, and 
many measuring twenty-two feet or more, in circumfer- 
ence five feet above the ground. He says that "the 
hemlock in this region seems to have succeeded the oak, 
while the beech and maple no doubt succeeded the hem- 
lock." This last inference would seem to have been made 
from the fact that clumps of large hemlock trees were, at 
that time, still growing at intervals among the larger 
deciduous trees. 

Indeed, there is no better established fact in vegeta- 
ble physiology than that of these alternations of forest 
growths. They sometimes come on gradually, but, in a 
majority of instances, they make their appearance at once 
on the cutting off of old forests, in the tracks of torna- 



80 TRUE GENESIS. 

does, or where fire has devastated extensive regions of 
timber. From the facts which have been gathered, it is 
difficult to determine any regular order of alternation, 
except that oaks and other deciduous trees succeed the 
different varieties of pine and other evergreen growths, 
and, perhaps, vice versa. In Dr. Hough's report upon 
American Forestry, he makes a brief summary of the 
order of these alternations in different sections of the 
country, on the authority of persons apparently more or 
less well-informed on the subject, but by no means accu- 
rate observers. He says that in the region about Green 
Bay, Wis., overrun by the fires of 1871, " dense growths 
of poplars and birches have sprung up, and are growing 
rapidly ; " but he omits the most important fact of all, 
in his failure to state the previous growths of timber, or 
whether there were any neighboring growths of poplar 
along the track of the burnt district from which seed 
might have been derived. 

Here are some of his more important statements: — 

" At Clarksville, Ga., oak and hickory lands, when 
cleared, invariably grew up with pine. This is true of that 
region of country generally." 

" At Aiken, S. C., the long-leaf pine is succeeded by 
oaks and other deciduous trees, and vice versa" 

" In Bristol County, Mass., in some cases, after pines 
have been cut off, oak, maple, and birch have sprung up 
abundantly." 



AL TERN A TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 8 1 

" In Hancock County, 111., oaks have been succeeded 
by hickories." 

" In East Hamburgh, Erie County, N. Y., a growth 
of hemlock, elm, and soft maple, was succeeded by beech, 
soft maple, and hard maple, but a good deal more of the 
last named than any other." 

This is the general character of the summary given, 
and if its object were simply to show the fact that these 
alternations actually took place (one that nobody has dis- 
puted in the last half century), his chapter on the " Alter- 
nations of Forest Growths," is a scientific success. The 
information really desired in these cases, was that im- 
parted by Dr. Dwight in his suggestive work of travel, in 
which all the incidental facts and surrounding circumstan- 
ces are fully given. It does not appear from any of the 
foregoing statements, given as a specimen, that there 
were any neighboring trees sufficiently near to have sup- 
plied seed for the new forests taking the place of the old, 
— manifestly the most important physiological fact con- 
nected with the whole inquiry, whether looking to proper 
forest-management, or to future " schools of forestry," 
certain to be established in this country, as they have 
been in most of the leading countries of Europe. 

It is, however, stated by Dr. Hough, in his voluminous 
report, that, " in New England, the pine (without giving 
its varieties) is often succeeded by the white birch, and, 
in New Jersey, by the oak ; the succession of oak by pine, 
and the reverse, in the southern states." And it is further 



82 TRUE GENESIS. 

stated, without reference to the nature and quality of the 
different soils, or the absence or presence of neighboring 
seed-trees, that " poplars and other soft woods are very 
often found coming up in pine districts that have been 
ravaged by fire." " We have noticed, " he continues, " in 
Nebraska, ash, elm, and box-elder following cottonwood. 
In the natural starting of timber in the prairie region of 
Illinois, where the stopping of fires allowed, we often see 
a hazel coppice ; after a time the Crataegus, and finally the 
oaks, black-walnuts, and other timber. These growths 
are often quite aggressive on the prairies. In Florida, the 
black-jack oak usually takes the place of the long-leaf 
pine." In all these cases, the contiguousness of similar, 
or dissimilar growths, is not stated. 

He nevertheless cites a most important fact respecting 
the alternations of timber growth, noticed by Sir Alex- 
ander Mackenzie, in his overland journey from Montreal 
to the Arctic Ocean, in 1789, who found, in the vicinity of 
Slave Lake, that the banks were covered with large quan- 
tities of burnt wood lying on the ground, where young 
poplar trees had sprung up immediately after the destruc- 
tion of the previous growths by fire. In noticing this fact, 
the indefatigable English explorer remarks : " It is a very 
curious and extraordinary circumstance that land covered 
with spruce, pine, and white birch, when laid waste by 
fire, should subsequently produce nothing but poplars, 
zvhere none of that species of tree was previously to be 
found" But facts of a similar character are too numer- 



AL TERN A T70ATS OF FORES T GRO WTHS. 83 

ous and well-authenticated to be questioned by any intel- 
ligent authority. And they all point to but one solution 
— that of primordial germs quickened into life by the 
necessary environing conditions. The appearance of a 
single poplar in the locality named, or even a dozen of 
them for that matter, might be accounted for on the the- 
ory that a bird of passage had dropped them there after 
the fire ; but, under no conceivable circumstances, could 
the dispersion of the requisite amount of seed to plant 
an extensive burnt district, along the banks of Slave Lake, 
have occurred on any other theory than that emphatically 
set forth, as a physiological fact, in the Bible genesis. 

There is manifestly importance enough attaching to 
this subject to justify a much wider range of observation 
and inquiry than has yet been made. Pine forests have 
been cut off in Alabama and Georgia, covering extensive 
areas, where there was not a single oak tree in a circuit of 
miles ; and yet the oak has promptly made its appearance, 
in several varieties, over the whole cleared district. And 
it is entirely safe to say that, had the ground been thor- 
oughly examined, from the surface to ten feet below it, 
after the pine had been felled, not the first sign of an acorn 
could have been met with anywhere w r ithin the whole 
area of the clearing, no matter whether it covered ten 
acres, twenty, or a hundred. The paths of the tornadoes 
we have referred to conclusively show this. The new- 
born forests, in these cases, do not come from seed, but 
from the living, indestructible, vital principles implanted 



84 TRUE GENESIS. 

in the earth, before it was specifically commanded to 
" bring forth," in the language of the Bible genesis. The 
"materialists," like Professor Bastian, Herbert Spencer, 
and others, may sneer at this declaration, but let them ad- 
vance some rational theory to the contrary, to account 
for these alternations of forest growths, before they lay 
bare the joints of their scientific armor too confidently to 
the thrusts of the next new-comer in the field of scientific 
investigation. Sneers are cheap weapons — the mere side- 
arms of pretension and frippery — but they never bear so 
deadly a gibe as when effectually turned on the sneerer. 

Professor Moritz Wagner, in his description of Mount 
Ararat, mentions " a singular phenomenon," to which his 
guide drew his attention, "in the appearance of several 
plants on soil lately thrown up by an earthquake, which 
grew nowhere else on the mountain, and had never been 
observed in this (that) region before." This writer, 
thereupon, goes into a disquisition upon the vitality of 
long-buried seeds, but only to mar the value of his very 
important observation. The fact that these new plants 
were rejected by the other soil of the mountain — that not 
thrown up by the earthquake — is the only other observa- 
tion of value made by this writer. And the importance 
of this one observation lies in the apparent, if not conclu- 
sive fact, that the conditions of the other soil of the 
mountain were not favorable for the development of the 
primordial germs, or vital units, contained in that which 
was thrown up by the earthquake, a circumstance that 



ALTERNATIONS OF FOREST GROWTHS. 



85 



most materially strengthens the view we have taken, as 
all candid and impartial readers will agree. 

Mr. Darwin inadvertently makes a very material con- 
cession in favor of the theory we have advanced, although 
unconscious of any such theory, except that so broadly 
and unqualifiedly put forth by the " panspermists " as to 
meet with a ready refutation. He is laboring, of course, to 
strengthen his position that nature eternally works to get 
rid of her imperfect forms, or to ensure " the survival of 
the fittest.'' But while his facts accomplish little in this 
direction, they establish much in another, as the reader 
will see. He says : " In Staffordshire, on an estate of 
a relative, where I had ample means of investigation, 
there was a large and extremely barren heath, which had 
never been touched by the hand of man ; but several 
hundred acres of exactly the same nature had been en- 
closed twenty-five years before, and planted with scotch 
fir. The change in the native vegetation of the planted 
part of the heath was most remarkable — more than is 
generally seen in passing from one quite different soil to 
another ; not only the proportional numbers of the heath 
plants were wholly changed, but twelve species of plants 
(not including grasses and sedges) flourished in the plan- 
tation which could not be found on the heath." 

The attempt is here made, by Mr. Darwin, to convey 
an altogether different meaning to his facts than what 
they will warrant, even as adroitly handled by him. No 
heath plants were " wholly changed " in characteristics, 



86 TRUE GENESIS. 

but only in proportional numbers; nor did the " twelve 
new species of plants " make their appearance by virtue 
of any law of variability or selection of the fittest. The 
growth of scotch fir had simply changed the conditions 
of the soil, so that certain varieties of heath growth dis- 
appeared for the want of " necessary conditions," and 
certain varieties of forest growth made their appearance 
because conditions favored. Similar, if not greater changes, 
are constantly occurring in hundreds of localities in New 
England, where choked and worn-out pasture lands arc 
left, untouched by the hand of man, to grow up as best 
they may into new forests. The open-field plants and 
shrubs entirely disappear, as the stronger and more ag- 
gressive trees, taking root in favoring soils, advance in the 
struggle for supremacy, while the less hardy and more 
modest plants — those quietly seeking shelter in the woods 
—make their appearance, because they find, beneath the 
shade of the usurping forest, the precise conditions neces- 
sary for their more successful growth. 

No perishable seeds have been awakened from their 
* sleep of untold centuries " by these changed conditions 
of the soil; but nature, everywhere obeying the divine 
mandate, brings forth her implanted life in all its bounti- 
ful diversity of stalk, leaf, bud, bough, blossom, fruit, — 
not in obedience to man's husbandry alone, but because, 
as the " vicar of God/' she must provide for her benefice. 
" Let the earth bring forth" is the eternal fiat. .Nature 
forever heeds it, and forever obeys it. ^ Oh, ye blind 



AL TERNA TIONS OF FOREST GRO WTHS. 87 

guides, who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel, 
doubt it if ye will. But forget not that nature has her 
" compunctious visitings," and will rise up in insurrection 
against you. Nothing in her breast lies dormant for ages, 
or even for an hour. Her appointed times and seasons 
forbid it. If the butterfly does not sport in her sunshine 
to-day, it is because it lies dead in its golden-colored 
shroud, and can never become a butterfly. In all her 
profusion and prodigality — flinging her glittering jewels, 
even in mid-winter, over all her enamored woods, and 
causing her little fountains to leap up from their crystal 
beds in delight, that they may be frozen, mid-air, into 
more sparkling jets — she exhibits no such munificence as 
in her unsparing prodigality of life. To be prodigal in 
this was the first command she received, and her great 
heart constantly throbs to give it expression. And in all 
this she simply obeys a kindly law which has been im- 
planted in her bosom, and can never be displanted. She 
has no need of seeds in her cunning laboratory to perpetu- 
ate plant-life, and only yields them to man for use, and 
not abuse. He can utilize them if he will, so that all 
things of beauty and golden-fruited promise shall be his. 
In the language of her greatest and most profoundly phil- 
osophical poet, — 

" Nature never lends 
The smallest scruple of her excellence, 
But, like a thrifty goddess, she determines 
Herself the glory of a creditor — 
Both thanks and use." 



gg TRUE GENESIS. 

Those who think, therefore, to make nature a debtor, 
by reversing her laws of propagation and making her de- 
pendent on what she bestows in use, will never find out 
the smallest scruple of her excellence, nor add to her glory 
as a creditor. All things are framed in her prodigality, 
and the seeds of plants and trees are no exception to the 
quality of her bestowals. We may reason, syllogize, 
speculate as we will, the first plant and the first tree w r ere 
not nature's thankless bastards, but her legitimate and 
loving offspring. She engendered them in her own fruit- 
ful breast, and her " copy is eterne." 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 

FEW questions have attracted more attention among 
vegetable physiologists, of late years, than the dis- 
persion and migration of seeds from place to place in the 
earth, and it is safe to say that none has been more un- 
satisfactorily answered. In the case of quite a number 
of plants and trees, special contrivances would seem to 
have been provided by nature for insuring their dispersion, 
as well as migration. With a smail number of plants, for 
instance, the seeds are discharged for short distances by 
the explosive force of their seed-vessels, when properly 
matured ; an equally small number have certain mem- 
branous contrivances, called " wings," by which they may 
be borne still greater distances ; others, again, are provi- 
ded with light feathery tufts, to which the seed is attached, 
and these may be carried by the winds several miles before 
finding a lodgment in the soil ; while many others are in- 
closed in prickly and barb-pointed coverings by which 
they attach themselves to animals, and even birds, and 
may be transported to almost any distance. But with 
the great majority of plants and trees, as the seeds fall so 
they lie, and must continue to lie until they either ger- 
minate or perish, or are accidentally dispersed or scattered 



9 o 



TRUE GENESIS, 



by some extrinsic agency. The anxiety of speculative 
botanists to account for the recognized alternations of 
forest and other growths, have led to the different theories 
of transportation we have named ; and when these theo- 
ries have been supplemented by the alleged wonderful 
vitality of seeds, in the cunning recesses in which nature 
manages to conceal them, they imagine the whole diffi- 
culty solved, when, in point of fact, it remains wholly 
unsolved. 

This theory of the " wonderful vitality M of seeds is 
simply one, as we have said, to force a conclusion — to get 
rid of a lion in the scientific path. Professor Marsh, with 
other eminent and scholarly writers on vegetable phys- 
iology, scouts the idea that the seeds of some of our cereal 
crops have been preserved for three or four thousand 
years in the " ashy dryness " of the Egyptian catacombs. 
But what better repository in which to preserve them? 
Certainly, none of our modern granaries, with all their 
machinery for keeping the grain dry, or from over-heating. 
Nor are the catacombs to be despised, as compared with 
any out-door means of storage yet suggested by the wit 
of man. The only means nature has of storage, or rather 
of preservation by storage, is to welcome the seed back 
to her bosom — the earth from which its parent-seed 
sprang — where it may be speedily quickened into life, and 
bear " other grain," not itself. For " that which thou 
sowest is not quickened, except it die; " and much more 
is that dead which is not quickened. Whenever seed is 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 91 

thus returned to nature's bosom — all-palpitating as it is 
with life — whether it quickens or not, it dies ; and there 
is no resurrection for dead seed from the earth, any more 
than there is for the occupants of the exhumed mummy- 
cases of ancient Thebes. 

The belief in this wonderful vitality of seeds, in the 
positions in which nature deposits them, is pretty much 
on a par with that which assigns a thousand years to the 
life of a crow. As nobody but the scholastic fool in the 
fable has ever attempted to verify the correctness of this 
latter belief, so it is safe to assume that the experiment 
of verifying the former will not be successfully undertaken 
within the next thousand years, to say the least. It is 
well known that the vitality of seeds (so far, at least, as 
nature handles them) depends upon her cunning contri- 
vances for their preservation, as well as their dispersion. 
But many seeds, in which these contrivances would seem 
to be the most perfect, will not germinate after the second 
year, and few will do so to advantage after the third or 
fourth year, even when they have been kept under the 
most favorable circumstances, or in uniform dryness and 
temperature. Farmers, who have had practical experience 
in this matter, and care little for what is merely theoretical, 
will never plant seed that is three or four years old when 
they can get that of the previous year's growth. It is 
certain that no hickory nut will retain its vitality beyond 
the first year of its exposure to a New England soil and 
climate, and few seeds are better protected by nature 



92 



TRUE GENESIS. 



against such exposure ; and it is equally questionable 
whether the chits to Dr. Dwight's pine cones would have 
had any better chance of survival at the time the Indians 
infested the neighborhood of Northampton, and regularly 
fired the woods every autumn. 

Although Professor Marsh confidently says, in his 
work on " Man and Nature," that " the vitality of seeds 
seems almost imperishable while they remain in the situa- 
tions in which nature deposits them/' he will no doubt 
admit that this statement rests on no experimental knowl- 
edge, but simply on the hypothesis that the new forests 
and new species of plants to which he refers, originated 
from seeds, and not from primordial germs everywhere im- 
planted in the earth. Dr. G. Chaplin Child, who swal- 
lows the " Egyptian wheat " story, mummy-cases and all, 
in speaking of some of the English " dykes " or mound- 
fences which have existed from time well-nigh immemo- 
rial, says : " No sooner are these dykes leveled than the 
seeds of, wild flowers, which must have lain in them for 
ages, sprout forth vigorously, just as if the ground had 
been recently sown with seed." He also mentions, as a 
more or less remarkable fact, " that a house, which was 
known to have existed for two hundred years, was pulled 
down, and no sooner was the surface soil exposed to the 
influence of light and moisture, than it became covered 
with a crop of wild-mustard or charlock." And he in- 
stances these facts to show that the seeds of this charlock, 
and these dyke plants, had lain dormant in the soil from 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



93 



the time the dykes were built, and the house erected. 
But these physiological facts, however well authenticated 
they may have been, are no more conclusive of the pres- 
ence of dormant seed, than the appearance of the common 
plantain about a recently built dwelling-house, where 
none ever grew before, is proof that the seeds of this com- 
mon household plant had lain dormant forages before the 
house was erected. We cannot tell why this common 
plant follows the domestic household, any more than we 
can tell why rats follow civilization. But they are both 
sufficiently annoying at times, to satisfy us that they do 
follow, however inexplicable the reason may be. 

The same writer further says, in connection with the 
foregoing statements : " Instances (of the vitality of seeds) 
might easily be multiplied almost indefinitely, but we 
shall be satisfied with noticing one of a very extraordinary 
kind. In the time of thejjnperor Hadrian, a*man died 
soon after he had eaten plentifully of raspberries. He 
was buried at Dorchester. About twenty-eight years ago, 
the remains of this man, together with coins of the Roman 
Emperor, were discovered in a coffin (!) at the bottom of a 
barrow, thirty feet under the surface. The man had thus 
lain undisturbed for some 1700 years. But the most curi- 
ous circumstance connected with the case was, that the 
raspberry seeds were recovered from the stomach (/) and 
sown in the garden of the Horticultural Society, where 
they germinated and grew into healthy bushes, " Here is 
circumstantiality enough to satisfy the most unlimited 



94 



TRUE GENESIS. 



skepticism, provided that the facts were satisfactorily 
vouched for by the living, and the record left by the dead 
were sufficiently explicit in detail, and conclusive in iden- 
tity of subject. Then to suggest even a reasonable doubt 
would, we admit, be equivalent to making truth a circum- 
stantial liar. 

But this most remarkable story will bear repetition, 
with a few running comments. " The man (presumably 
a Roman soldier) died seventeen hundred years ago/' 
This is not unlikely. " He died of eating too plentifully of 
raspberries ; " a circumstance not altogether improbable. 
" He was buried at Dorchester; " where, of course, there 
were no records of deaths and burials kept at the time, 
and hence, we should have to question the record, if one 
were presented. " He was also buried in a coffin, or, at 
least, dug up in one. ,, This statement must be received 
cum grano. The Romans never used coffins, and, under 
the empire, they burnt most of their dead. After a battle, 
however, they generally piled them up in heaps, and, 
where there was a lack of fuel to burn them, they covered 
them with the surface soil, taking good care to put a 
Roman coin in each soldier's mouth, so that he might 
pay the ferryman in Hades. " There was thirty-five 
feet of surface soil shoveled on top of this particular 
Roman/' — showing that he was a very consequential per- 
sonage in camp. No wonder, then, that all these nice 
particularities of statement should have been circumstan- 
tially noted in the commanding general's " order of the 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



95 



day," and thus been handed down to posterity for the 
future advancement of science ! " He had lain undis- 
turbed for nearly two thousand years." Almost any one 
would have done so, with that amount of surface soil 
shoveled on top of him. " The seeds were recovered from 
his stomach;" that is, after improvidently snatching away 
the Roman soldier's life, they took good care to preserve 
their own, as well as the stomach in which they were de- 
posited. " The seeds were planted in the Horticultural 
Society's garden, where they flourished vigorously." 

All these circumstantially narrated facts (?) were gath- 
ered (by somebody) about forty years ago. In what au- 
thentic and satisfactorily verified record are they to be 
found to-day? The writer gives us no clue. The stomach, 
the coffin, the Roman coins, some of the wonderfully pre- 
served seeds, as well as the obolus in the mouth of the 
dead soldier, should be found somewhere. They could 
not have disappeared in a night. If they had withstood 
the relentless tooth of time for seventeen hundred years, 
in the surface soil of Dorchester, the last forty years 
ought not to have obliterated all trace of them. The 
story is simply too incredible for belief, if printed in forty 
u Great Architects of Nature." 

From 1847 to 185 !> the writer went into any number 
of Wisconsin mounds — those not essentially dissimilar 
from the Roman barrows in England — in company with 
the late I. A. Lapham, of Milwaukee ; and the idea of 
finding any human stomach, with or without seeds in it — 



g6 TRUE GENESIS. 

with probably not half the time intervening between 
burial and exhumation, as in the case of this Roman 
soldier — would have been instantly rejected by the dis- 
tinguished archaeologist accompanying us. Indeed, had 
any such discovery been made, he would have unhesita- 
tingly pronounced the mound tampered with for the pur- 
poses of imposition. It is possible that surface soil, con- 
taining some raspberry seeds, may have been taken to 
the " Horticultural Society's garden " to which Dr. Child 
refers, and planted there as stated ; but that they were 
from a human stomach that had lain buried for seventeen 
hundred years in the surface soil of England, or any other 
country, is simply preposterous. It caps the climax of 
all the wonderful " seed-stories " yet manufactured for 
the scientific mind to wrestle with. It is easy enough to 
find soil about old stumps, and fallen trunks and branches 
of trees, which will produce raspberries, either with or 
without the presence of seed. And soil might have been 
taken from the bottom of this Dorchester barrow which 
produced them. But the appearance of the bushes must 
have depended on the conditions of the soil, not on 
seeds eaten by a Roman soldier nearly two thousand 
years ago. That version of the story must be summarily 
dismissed the attention of scientific men. 

Professor Marsh, in the work to which we have already 
several times alluded, says : " When newly cleared ground 
is burnt over in the United States, the ashes are hardly 
cold before they are covered with a crop of fire-weed, a 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



97 



tall herbaceous plant, very seldom growing under other 
circumstances, and often not to be found for a distance of 
many miles from the clearing." The botanical name of 
this plant is Er edit kites liieracifolia, and it is well known 
to the botanists of New England. Its seeds are almost as 
destructible by fire as thistle-down itself; and it is not to 
be supposed that any of the seeds borne by the winds or 
by birds, and scattered through the clearing before it was 
burned, could have survived the intense heat to which 
they must have been subjected in the burning off of a 
heavy and dense growth of felled timber. The seeds, if 
any, must have been scattered after the fire, and not 
before it. But these heavy clearings — those in which we 
have witnessed the most abundant crops of fire-weed — 
are generally burnt off in the early spring, when there are 
no seeds to be scattered, as all those of the previous 
year's growth find their proper lodgment in the soil before 
the winter fully closes in. The seeds for which Professor 
Marsh would have to search, therefore, would be those 
grown in some corresponding latitude, or plant zone, in tke 
southern ke?nispkere, not within thousands of miles from 
the clearing in which they so promptly make their 
appearance. 

Professor Marsh suggests, however, that they may 
have come from " the deeply buried seeds of a former 
vegetation, quickened into life by the heat." But had 
he examined these plants, in their incipient stages of 
growth, he would have found that they sprung directly 



gS TRUE GENESIS. 

from the surface of the burnt soil, their initial rootlets 
hardly extending to the depth of two-thirds of an inch 
below it, and where they must have utterly perished from 
the heat. The theory he suggests is the only possible 
one, he thinks, to account for the mystery, and hence its 
suggestion by him. But he has only to pass one of the 
delicate seeds of this plant through the flame of a candle 
to see that it instantly perishes by fire. His suggested 
theory must be abandoned, therefore, and that of the 
Bible genesis accepted in its place. 

The fact is, and it ought to be well known to the closer 
student of nature, that the fire-weed makes its appear- 
ance in the " conditions" of the burnt soil, just as stra- 
monium does in the conditions of the soil where a coal- 
pit has been recently burned ; that is, not from seed, but 
from " vital units," or germs, everywhere present in the 
earth — those taking advantage of environing conditions, 
just as Bacteria or Tornlce spring from the proper or- 
ganic infusions. And the young shoots of stramonium, 
in a recently burned coal-pit, will be found to spring 
directly from the surface of the burnt ground, where all 
seeds and living organism must have perished in the heat, 
and not at any considerable depth below it. Their first 
appearance is on the immediate surface of the burnt 
ground, the same as in the case of fire-weed, and at a 
time when there were no seeds to be distributed, except 
such as must have come from the southern hemisphere, 
or been casually picked up by birds, and taken their slim 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



99 



chances of survival after passing through the natural 
" gristmills " of the birds. And even this supposition, 
would only account for the appearance of a single stra- 
monium plant or two, not for a thick bed of it covering the 
entire ground. The theory of seed-distribution, in this 
and other cases, is wholly out of the question ; as much 
so as when white clover makes its appearance on a closely- 
grazed prairie, hundreds of miles away from where there 
has been a single sprig of clover growing in a thousand 
years. Every closely observant person, living for any 
length of time on our western prairies, is familiar with 
the fact that when the rank and hardier grasses, usually 
growing thereon, are effectually fed down by stock, and 
especially by sheep, the prairie grasses disappear, and the 
ground at once comes in with white clover, and the other 
nutritious gramma or grasses of our common pasture 
lands. No seed has been sown in these localities, and 
none could have been found had every square inch of the 
surface soil been examined by the most powerful micro- 
scope. The white clover and these nutritious grasses 
make their appearance on these prairies, just as the first 
sprig of vegetation did on the earth, not from seed, but 
from preexisting vital units or primordial germs, im- 
planted therein from the beginning, and awaiting the 
necessary conditions for their development and growth. 

The " bird theory " is the one almost universally re- 
lied upon for the explanation of these phenomena, where 
the seeds distributed, or supposed to be distributed, are 



100 TRUE GENESIS. 

not winged. But we are satisfied that birds perform no 
such important office, in the matter of seed-distribution, 
as is generally attributed to them. We have examined, 
during the past two seasons, a large number of bird-drop- 
pings, and find our previous impressions respecting them 
fully verified. With all the more delicate seeds — those of 
our common field grasses and weeds — the chances are a 
thousand to one that none of them will ever pass the 
cloaca of the bird eating them, in any condition to germi- 
nate. All seed-eating birds are also gravel-eaters ; and 
the pebbles and gravel they eat are mostly silex, or the 
material from which our best buhrstones are made. 
These pass into the gizzard, or pyloric division of the 
bird's stomach, where they are utilized, the same as we 
utilize our buhrstones. The gizzard has sharply corru- 
gated interior walls, extremely thick and muscular, which 
involuntarily contract and expand, giving the bird a tre- 
mendous grinding power over his food, considering the 
size of his grinding apparatus. The seeds — all the seeds, 
in fact, he eats — pass at once into his crop, or the natural 
"hopper" to his " gristmill," where they undergo a mois- 
tening or macerating process previous to being ground 
into the finest pulp in the gizzard. As a general rule, all 
the seeds a bird eats are ground into this pulpy state 
before they pass into the intestinal canal, extending from 
the gizzard to the cloaca. The hard, semi-translucent, and 
highly elastic outer coating of most small seeds, may be 
measurably preserved in its passage through the gizzard, 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. I0 I 

and, resuming its oval shape in the thinner pulpy mass 
contained in the upper portion of the intestine, present 
the appearance of seed in the cloacal discharges, and thus 
deceive the casual observer, But the use of a spatula 
and a small piece of polished stone slab will show that the 
entire discharge is excrementitious matter, with the single 
exception of this silicious coating of the seeds. 

The case is different, however, with the fruit-eating 
birds. The fruits they consume are retained but a com- 
paratively short time in the crop, pass hurriedly through 
the gizzard, and no doubt carry along with them some of 
the smaller seeds of berries, and now and then the pit of 
a cherry or small plum. The gizzard, in these cases, is 
simply gorged with the pulp and juices of the fruit, its 
muscular action more or less relaxed, and some of the 
seeds consequently escape the grinding process they would 
otherwise undergo. And yet we are satisfied that a ma- 
jority of these seeds even, are more or less thoroughly 
triturated by a healthy gravel-eating bird. This would 
certainly be the case if they were retained for any length 
of time in the pyloric division of the bird's stomach. All 
birds have gizzards, but their grinding capacity depends 
very much on the character of the food they eat. Birds 
of prey, and others subsisting mostly or entirely on animal 
food, have thin, membranous, and comparatively flabby 
gizzards ; while those living on hard grains and seeds 
have extremely thick, powerful, and muscular ones, — 
those capable of crushing up and thoroughly triturating 



102 TRUE GENESIS. 

all the food they take into their crops. These gizzards 
are nature's gristmills, and they grind exceedingly fine. 
If any seed escapes, it is because the mill has been 
flooded by the bird, and not because of any, defect in the 
grinding apparatus. * 

These birds are not, therefore " natural sowers of 
seeds," as Professor Marsh and some others claim ; but are, 
at most, only accidental or chance-sowers. Nature never 
designed that they should do anything more than con- 
sume the food they eat, or submit it to the proper action 
of their digestive organs. It might as well be claimed 
that the secretary bird is a " natural sower of serpents," 
as that many of the grain-eating birds are " the natural 
sowers of seeds." The theory is too foraminated — too 
full of loopholes and unsatisfactory conditions — to be ac- 
cepted as an explanation of the more general phenomena 
presented. The fruit-eating quadrupeds are, relatively, 
far better sowers of seeds than the birds, for they eat 
fruit without sending their grists to mill. Dr. Dwight 
rejected the transportation theory as early as 1820, and 
Professor Marsh gives any number of cases where it was 
necessary for him to abandon it. And yet some of our 
ablest writers, publishing works of quite recent date, ad- 
here to it as the only theory that accounts for all the 
phenomena presented. 

Professor George Thurber, in speaking of the dissemi- 
nation of seeds, finds other agencies therefor than winds, 
birds, quadrupeds, etc, such as we have already named. 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 103 

For instance, he claims that rivers, ocean currents, moun- 
tain torrents, and even wars, contribute largely towards 
their dispersion and dissemination throughout different 
parts of the earth. All this may be true to a limited ex- 
tent ; but none of these enumerated agencies will account 
for more than a very few of the many well-authenticated 
facts we have given, and many others that might be 
given, if our limits permitted. Among the instances 
where wars have had, or are claimed to have had, an im- 
portant agency in the distribution of seeds throughout an 
invaded country, he mentions the fact that " after our late 
civil war, a little leguminous plant {Lespedeza striata) 
sprang up all over the southern states/' and adds, " that 
it was not known how it came, or where from, but its 
native country is Japan." In some parts of the South it 
is known as " Japan clover," and is highly valued as a 
forage plant. But the war had nothing more to do with 
the appearance of this plant "all over the southern 
states," than the changes of the moon, or the phenome- 
nal man therein. The plant had been noticed in certain 
localities in the South before the war, but the circum- 
stance of its very general appearance throughout a large 
area of that section of country, was not particularly 
noticed until the confederate troops began to move from 
one southern state to another, when, finding it a valuable 
forage plant, they naturally enough regarded it as a 
providential dispensation, especially in those sections 
where other forage plants and nutritious gramma were 



104 



TRUE GENESIS. 



not abundant. But this plant would have made its ap- 
pearance just the same had the war never been thought 
of as a possible remedy for aggressive legislation, how- 
ever real or imaginary it may have been. 

It can be easily accounted for, however, on the theory 
we have suggested — that of the germinal principle of life 
implanted in the earth, as the Bible genesis indubitably 
indicates. The plant in question has long been a native 
of Japan, which lies in the same warm temperate zone as 
the southern states. The same general hygrometric and 
thermometric conditions prevail throughout the two coun- 
tries or sections of country. These, added to the neces- 
sary telluric conditions, give the required moisture, heat, 
and soil-constituents for the development of the Japan 
clover in the South, the same as it was originally devel- 
oped in its native country. And it is just as much native 
to the South now, as it was hundreds or thousands of 
years ago to Japan. It did not come from seeds scat- 
tered by war, or any other imaginable agency of man, 
but from the indestructible, vital units or germs implanted 
in the earth itself. Had the plant appeared in any one 
locality, or even in half a dozen separate localities, in the 
South, it might possibly have been accounted for on the 
theory of Professor Thurber. But its simultaneous ap- 
pearance over " all the southern states," as he puts it, 
absolutely negatives any such theory. Neither winds, 
river or ocean currents, casual mountain torrents, birds, 
quadrupeds, war, or even man himself, could have effected 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 105 

this sudden and wide distribution of the plant in ques- 
tion. It came as did all other plant-life, in the first in- 
stance, from geographical conditions — those favoring the 
development of primordial germs — just as the different 
organic infusions, experimentally prepared by the physi- 
ologist, produce their respective forms of infusorial life ; 
each distinctive form depending on the chemical condi- 
tions of the infusion at the time the microscopic examina- 
tion is made. Change the conditions, or defer the ex- 
amination until the conditions themselves are changed, 
and other and different forms of life will make their ap- 
pearance, in harmony with the physiological law we have 
named. 

This wonderful play of the vital forces of nature is no 
less dependant on " conditions " — on the necessary pre- 
existing plasma, chemically balanced soils, organic solu- 
tions, etc. — than the alleged " dynamical aggregates/' 
molecules organiques" " plastide particles, " or " highly 
differentiated life-stuff," insisted upon by the physicists, 
in their materialistic theories of life. These physicists 
make even the slightest change in developmental phases 
—••whether statical, as in the case of crystals, or dynami- 
cal, as in the case of living organisms — to depend on 
physical conditions,— those aiding and abetting what 
they call the " molecular play of physical forces." But 
with their theory that matter and motion are the only 
self-subsistent, indestructible elements in the universe, 
what " molecular play " can be attributed to matter but 



lo6 TRUE GENESIS, 

that which is derived from motion, or some one of its 
alleged correlates ? We can only imagine two sorts of 
motion as possible metaphysical conceptions in connec- 
tion with matter — molar motion, or that relating to 
matter moving in mass, and molecular motion, or that 
relating to the movements of matter in its unaggregated 
form, or as confined to molecules. 

But motion itself is not an absolute entity. It is not 
so much even as a collocating or placing force of matter 
itself. It is, at best, only a mechanical impulse imparted 
by one moving body to another ; or, more accurately 
speaking, a continuous change of place in a moving 
body. In other words, it is simply a process or mode of 
action, and stands in about the same relation to matter 
as growth does to a living plant or tree. Independently 
of matter it has no existence, either objectively or sub- 
jectively, or even as a metaphysical conception. To al- 
lege its indestructibility, as the physicists do, is simply to 
predicate an additional property of indestructible matter. 
We may call it " force " — something that constantly ex- 
pends itself in a moving body — but it is utterly incapable 
of definition, or of conception even, except as it stands 
related to such moving body. All the marvellous " corre- 
lates of motion," therefore, producing such wonderful 
effects upon matter, in both its molar and molecular 
states or conditions, are nothing more nor less than vague 
and inconclusive inductions, derived from premises having, 
at best, nothing but a relative existence in a universe of 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 10/ 

moving matter. It would be decidedly better to agree 
with Haeckel, that matter is the only actual existence, 
than to predicate of matter a co-existent and wholly 
inexplicable " somewhat, " whereon to base a purely 
physical hypothesis of life. 

But let us return from this slight digression. The 
beautiful and purely local fern (Schizcea pusilla) grow- 
ing in the pine barrens of New Jersey, affords quite as 
conclusive proof of the correctness of the Bible genesis 
of life as the phenomenal appearance of Japan clover in 
the South. It was at one time supposed that this most 
delicate and beautiful of all our ferns was peculiar to the 
New Jersey pine barrens. But it has been ascertained 
that it grows quite as abundantly in similar barrens in 
New Zealand, which are in the south temperate zone, at 
about the same latitude south, that these pine barrens of 
New Jersey occupy in the temperate zone north. So 
that, at whatever period this fern originally made its ap- 
pearance in either locality, it unquestionably found the 
exact thermometric, hygrometric, telluric, and other con- 
ditions necessary for the development of its vital germs. 
Take any accurate, or even half-accurate, chart of plant 
distribution on the earth's surface, and it will be found 
that, everywhere, under the same favoring conditions, 
plants of the same genera and species make their appear- 
ance independently of any known processes of dissemina- 
tion in the case of seeds. The distribution is not one of 
seeds, but rather of geographical conditions — thermome- 



108 TRUE GENESIS. 

trie, hygrometric, telluric, and possibly chemical. And 
this is true of all vegetation, whether growing in the 
same plant zones, in high latitudes, at high altitudes, 
or under one degree of temperature and mois- 
ture or another. Whenever the telluric conditions are 
the same or similar, in the respective localities named, 
and the temperature and moisture correspond, the 
necessary plant distribution follows in obedience to the 
divine mandate — " Let the earth bring forth." This is 
the one uniform law that governs everywhere, and the 
only one that accounts for all the diversified manifesta- 
tions of plant-life, now, as heretofore, taking place upon 
our globe. And the same is measurably true of animal 
life. It accounts for the appearance of every form of 
life in organic infusions ; for Bacteria in the blood, Torulcz 
in the tissues, plastide particles, morphological cells, and 
every other vital manifestation, from the smallest con- 
ceivable " unit" of life in protaplasmic matter, to the 
lordliest and most defiant forest oak that ever bared its 
arms to the storms and tempests of centuries. A purely 
materialistic science may perk its head with an air of 
affected incredulity, and superciliously turn aside from 
this hypothesis, because it does not shock our venera- 
tion for the Sacred Scriptures, but let its special advo- 
cates advance some more consistent and rational life- 
theory than that of " molecular machinery worked by 
molecular force," or content themselves, with Dr. Gull, 
An confessing that they are unable to draw the first line 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. I09 

between " living matter " and " dead matter,'' as they 
absurdly use these terms. 

It is conceded that much extravagant speculation 
has been wasted upon this question of the distribution 
of seeds. The ambition of each new writer has seem- 
ingly been to hit upon some new theory of distribution. 
The " bird theory" is a failure, as we have shown ; nor 
do they invariably fly due east or west, so as to supply 
the several climatic zones with their respective vegeta- 
tions. The same is true of the " squirrel theory," for 
this nimble little rodent is as likely to head north or 
south as to follow the course of the sun ; the " wind 
theory " is subject to too many shifts and changes to be 
accounted a reliable agency; the " river-and-ocean- 
current theories " are still less satisfactory, since rivers 
flow in diverse directions, and ocean currents bear with 
safety only their own aquatic plants ; the " mummy- 
case theory " is hardly an accredited agency, and the 
"war theory" is attended with too much destruction 
of life to be safely relied on as conserving the vital 
forces of nature. The climatic zones, and high and 
low altitudes, have still to be consulted to get at the 
real causes of distribution, or such as conclusively satisfy 
the scientific mind. For no single plant is really a cosmop- 
olite. They are simply the habitats of their own sepa- 
rate zones, except as high altitudes are reached, and 
climatic and other conditions favor the appearance of 
such vegetation as belongs to other plant zones. If 



HO TRUE GENE SIS. 

we would find the more common plants and weeds of 
New England in North Carolina or Tennessee, we must 
go into the mountainous regions of those states, at an 
altitude which compensates for the difference in lati- 
tude, and where the influencing conditions of plant-life 
are essentially the same. In such localities, we shall 
find the same household plants, garden weeds, and 
general vegetation, as in higher northern latitudes, not 
because their seeds have been borne thither from New 
England or elsewhere, but because the same climatic, 
telluric and other conditions prevail as in the more 
northern localities. And these conditions are what 
determine the development and growth of local vege- 
tations. 

And so of the alpine firs, grasses, harebells, lichens, 
mosses, etc. Their seeds have not been scattered, by 
any known agencies, over intervening regions, for thou- 
sands of miles or more, in order to find lodgment on 
these lofty mountain cones; but, conditions being the 
same, the same vegetable growths appear. This is nature's 
method of propagating " vital units " and diversifying 
plant-life — geographical conditions everywhere determin- 
ing the proper distribution. But if nature is so prolific 
of vital resources, in the propagation of plant-life, what 
need has she of natural seeds ? We anticipate this in- 
quiry only to answer it ; for we recognize it as a legiti- 
mate one in this connection. Our answer is that the 
seeds are given for the use of man, that he may control 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 1 1 1 

and utilize vegetation, and not have to depend on more 
or less uncertain conditions. Agricultural chemistry 
must be carried to a much higher degree of perfection 
than it is likely to reach in the next ten centuries at 
least, to determine whether any particular plat of ground 
has been chemically balanced for the growth of wheat, to 
the exclusion of other cereal crops. Besides, the process 
of soil-balancing might be altogether too expensive to 
be indulged in by judicious husbandry. These chemical 
conditions admit of too many possible failures, in bal- 
ancing even the smallest patch of ground, to justify 
experiments in the direction named. Seeds also sub- 
serve the important subsidiary purpose of supplying food 
for many birds and animals, more or less useful to man. 

But chemistry has its limits as to usefulness in all 
human laboratories. As man's wisdom is limited, so is 
his power over the elementary forces of nature confined 
to very narrow boundaries. It is given to him to search 
out many inventions, and to pry, thus far and no farther, 
into the secrets of nature, or, more properly speaking, 
into the secrets of God. There is no doubt that if our 
chemico-molecular theorists respecting life-phenomena, 
could produce, in their laboratories, the exact inter- 
uterine plasma, or plasmic conditions, of an animal — any 
animal, in fact — and continue these conditions during 
the proper period of gestation, they might produce life 
de novo* But the most daring physicist would stand 
* In a note to Prof. Bastian's " Beginnings of Life " (voL II. p. 537) an im- 



112 TRUE GENESIS. 

aghast at the bare proposal of such an experiment. 
Neither his knowledge of chemistry, nor the present 
uncertain value attaching to " molecular machinery," 
would justify him, for a moment, in entering upon such a 
purely tentative and empirical ^undertaking. 

It is hardly necessary to assume that the same law of 
vital force governs in the appearance and geographical 
distribution of fungi, as universally obtains in the higher 
and more complex vegetal growths. And although it 
may be difficult, in some instances, to draw the precise 
line between certain low mycological forms and the 
amoeboid and some other primitive manifestations of 
animal life, yet all vegetable physiologists agree in as- 
signing a purely vegetable origin to all the primary 
groups of fungi — their general cellular character de- 

portant fact is mentioned as obtained from the writings of Dr. Schneider, 
to wit, that Nematoids (microscopical forms) may be " obtained at will," 
almost as readily as mushrooms, by a process entirely independent of spores. 
For instance, small pieces of beef were carefully examined to see if they 
contained any of the ova of Nematoids, and, finding none, they were 
buried in a small quantity of earth (also carefully examined for the pre- 
sence of Nematoids or their ova) in a gallipot. " After three weeks," says 
Prof. B. " this earth was found to be absolutely swarming with two kinds of 
Nematoids — quite different from any forms which I had previously, seen, 
although I had been seeking them for more than two years previously in all 
sorts of situations." The reason why he had not found them previously, was 
because the "necessary conditions " for their appearance had not been ob- 
tained by him, or he had not sought for them in their proper environment. 
They were not produced " at will," but were the natural outgrowth of con- 
ditions, as much so as the spores of fungi, which make their appearance 
whenever and wherever the necessary environing conditions exist. Accord- 
ing to Dr. Gros, it takes about three w T eeks for these Nematoid forms to de- 
velop into a reproductive state. 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 113 

termining their proper place in classification. And in 
all their extended family groups, pervading nature as 
widely as animal and vegetable life, we find that uniform 
chemical and other conditions produce uniform mycologi- 
cal results. Spores are no more necessary for their ap- 
pearance, in the first instance, than acorns are essential 
to the appearance of an oak forest when it succeeds 
the pine. Wherever the necessary conditions of mois- 
ture and heat are found to obtain, in connection with de- 
cayed or decaying substances, the particular form of 
fungus indicated thereby, whether parasitic or non- 
parasitic, will make its appearance. Continuously damp 
walls, or wall-paper, will produce them in specific variety, 
not because their invisible spores are flying about in the 
atmosphere to find appropriate lodgment, but because 
the necessary conditions obtain for their manifestation, 
or for the development of their vital units— those every- 
where diffused, and ready to burgeon forth from the 
proper matrix, or from certain nutrient conditions to be 
met with in all vegetable substances, after the process of 
decay has commenced. Some orders appear only in a 
single matrix, but the greater part of them flourish on 
different decaying substances. 

Dr. M. C. Cooke, in speaking of non-parasitic fungi, 
and especially of moulds, says : " It would be far mord 
difficult to mention substances on which they are never 
developed than to indicate where they have been found. " 
The parasitic fungi, however, generally confine them- 



U4 



TRUE GENESIS. 



selves to certain special plants, and rarely to any other. 
It is only the condition of these special plants, when 
affected by decay, that seems favorable for their de- 
velopment ; not because their spores (assuming that 
all fungi come from spores,) possess the intelligence to 
fly about and hunt up the proper nutrient matter on 
which to subsist during their developmental progress 
from specific spores into genetic forms of life. The 
rust or blight of grain is not the cause, therefore, but 
rather the result, of the common disease known as 
" blight," Without some excess or deficiency of ab- 
sorption and elaboration in the growth of grain or 
plants — something essentially disturbing their normal 
and harmonious processes of development — no mycologi- 
cal forms would appear on their stems or roots, nor 
would they develop themselves on their fading leaves 
or congested and decaying fruit. To say that there is 
any intelligent preference in these fungi — the different 
species of Mucor, for instance — for disgusting offal over 
decaying fruit, bread, paste, preserves, etc., is to predi- 
cate a higher degree of intelligence of fungus spores 
than of the average brute creation, with all its wonder- 
ful instincts for guidance. 

We might refer to other classes of fungi developing 
themselves in the testa of hard seeds, and in the interior 
of acorns, sweet chestnuts, etc., — those in which there 
is no discoverable external opening by the aid of the 
microscope — to show the absolute absurdity of the 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. \ \ 5 

theory that the spores of fungi, including the non-para- 
sitic and other autonomous moulds, go madly foraging 
about the country in pursuit of decaying cocoanuts, 
apples, pears, plums, oranges, etc., and even committing 
their depredations on hermetically canned fruits, the 
concealed honeycomb of beehives, the pupa of moths, 
and whatever else they may intelligently select as a de- 
sirable matrix or habitat. No such theory as this will 
stand the test of thorough research and investigation, 
in any mycological direction. Fungi everywhere make 
their initial appearance in the conditions of decay, as 
plants and trees originally make theirs in the environing 
conditions of vital manifestation. That our life-giving 
atmosphere — the l< pater omnipotens Aitlier " of Virgil, 
" descending into the bosom of his joyous spouse (the 
earth) in fructifying showers, and great himself, mingling 
with her great body " for the development of all things 
of life — should be so immeasurably thronged with death- 
pursuing fungi that myriads of their spores might dance 
without jostling on the point of a cambric needle, is 
infinitely more fanciful than the conceptions of the poet, 
in personifying the atmosphere as " father ^Lther," 
and the earth as his " joyous spouse." But life, with 
its " pardlike spirit, beautiful and swift," has reached its 
highest conceptions in the mind of the poet, not in the 
speculations of the scientist. What a " mingled yarn," 
spun from many-colored yet invisible threads, is it in 
the creative mind of a Shakespeare, and how it looms 



Il6 TRUE GENESIS. 

up into " a dome of many-colored glass, staining the 
white radiance of eternity," under the magic touch of 
a Shelley ! And yet how is it dwarfed down to a con- 
temptible piece of " molecular machinery " by the sci- 
entist — one so utterly contemptible in its manifestations 
that it is ordered to take " a back seat " in this universe 
of all-potential matter and motion ! 

Dr. Cooke, in his " Handbook of British Fungi," 
virtually concedes that the spores of the large puff-ball 
(Lycoperdon giganteiini), as well as those of mushrooms, 
truffles, and other edible fungi (those with whose meth- 
ods of propagation man is best acquainted), may be 
produced artificially. But the process by which their 
production is thus effected, is more properly a natural 
than an artificial one. In speaking of truffle-grounds, 
he says (quoting from Broome) " that whenever a plan- 
tation of beech, or beech and fir, is made in the chalky 
districts of Salisbury Plain, after the lapse of a few years 
truffles are produced, and that the plantations continue 
productive for a period of from ten to fifteen years, after 
which they cease to be so." No truffle spores were 
planted in these cases, but the conditions of the soil, 
interlaced by the roots and shaded by the branches of 
the young beech trees, or the beech and fir, became 
favorable for the development of truffle " germs," and 
they made their appearance just as mushrooms do in 
caves and other places, where artificial beds are made 
and chemically balanced for their development and 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



117 



growth. And the reason why they disappeared, after 
a period of ten or fifteen years, was simply because the 
proper nutriment of the soil was exhausted, and not in 
consequence of its being too deeply shaded by the grow- 
ing trees. One uniform rule would seem to govern in the 
culture of this much-coveted fungus. Wherever the 
necessary environing conditions obtain, they appear, 
and wherever these conditions fail, they disappear, not- 
withstanding the most persistent efforts to save them by 
watering the soil with fresh infusions of the plant. In 
proof of this, one form of truffle (Tuber cestivuni) appears 
under beech trees, another form (Tuber macrosporuni) 
under oak trees, and still a third form (Tuber brumale) 
under oaks and white poplars ; showing that so slight a 
change in soil conditions as that resulting from the 
presence of poplars among oaks, produces a very mate- 
rial change in the character of the fungus — one amount- 
ing to a specific difference in variety. 

The process of artificially producing mushroom spores 
is a very simple one, and may be easily followed. You 
have only to collect a quantity of horse-droppings, mingle 
with them some common road sand, place them under 
cover, see that they are well beaten down in order to 
prevent over-heating — turning them occasionally for the 
same purpose — and in due time they will generate suffi- 
cient spores for a dozen mushroom beds of the ordinary 
size. The reason for their appearance is the same as 
that governing truffle spores — they come whenever con- 



Il8 TRUE GENESIS. 

ditions favor, that is, whenever the soil is chemically 
balanced for their development and growth. In other 
words, they come because it is just as impossible for 
them not to come, in their proper environing con- 
ditions, as it is for the earth, in its present cosmical 
relations, not to respond to its axial rotation. " Let 
the earth bring forth " is just as much an out- 
spoken law of nature, and one as inexorably obeyed, 
as that unerring force of gravity which led Lever- 
rier, in the faith of his inductions, to indicate the 
precise point in the heavens where the far-off planet, 
now bearing his name, might be seen by the required 
telescope. 

Dr. Cooke, quoting Mr. Cuthill's directions for pro- 
ducing mushroom spores, says : " These little collections 
of horse-droppings and road sand, if kept dry in shed, 
hole, or corner, under cover, will, in a short time, gen- 
erate plenty of spawn, and will be ready to spread on the 
surface of the bed in early autumn. " The collections 
should, of course, be made in the early summer. But it 
is no part of our object to indicate, in this connection, 
the process of truffle or mushroom culture. We merely 
refer to the methods to show that the vital units, or 
germinal principles of life, in the case of fungi, are just 
as dependent on " conditions " for their development, 
as were the primordial germs of the gigantic cryptogams 
of the carboniferous era. These primordial germs, or 
the ZRA of the Bible genesis, must have preceded the 



DISTTIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 



II 9 



first fungous growth, as they preceded the first spore- 
bearing cryptogam. 

M. Gasparin, in his report on the production of 
truffles, made to the great " Paris Exposition " of 1855, 
refers to the " natural truffle-grounds at Vaucluse, ,, 
where the " common oak produces truffles like the ever- 
green oak; " although, in other localities, owing no doubt 
to the different conditions of the soil, those gathered at 
the base of the one species of oak differ very materially 
from those gathered at the base of the other. All these 
experimental results, and many others we might give 
in connection with the culture of edible fungi, point to 
the conditions of the soil, produced by natural rather 
than artificial means, as all-essential for the propagation 
of fungus spores, as well as their development into full- 
sized plants. The cultivation of other and minuter 
fungi, for scientific purposes, need not be referred to in 
this connection. The same general observations will be 
found to apply in the case of all the experiments tried, 
although some very curious and remarkable modifications 
occur where pseudospores are to be found in the mice- 
lium of different plants. Nearly all these fungi have 
their own parasites, originating undoubtedly in the 
diseased conditions of the plant from which they derive 
their nutriment. Indeed, all fungi, whether parasitic or 
non-parasitic, have their origin, more or less definitely 
occurring, in decay. It is no more true that death is a 
necessity of life, than that life is an equal necessity of 



120 TRUE GENESIS. 

death. As out of the dead past springs the eternally 
living present, so from the " muddy vesture of decay 
" spring all the marvellous powers of reproduction with 
which nature was endowed from the beginning. 

But it is unnecessary to dwell longer on the spores of 
fungi. As with the seeds of plants and trees, these 
spores never had an existence, and never could have 
had one, before the first independent fungus appeared 
to produce them. The fungus before the spore is the 
inevitable induction. No distinction between necessary 
and contingent truth can ever take a stronger hold than 
this on the human mind. Whence, then, the first fun- 
gus ? or whence, rather, all those colonies, families, 
orders, divisions, and countless distinct individuals, ex- 
tant everywhere, in the mycological world ? The answer 
we shall give will be anticipated from what we have 
already so confidently affirmed. Life comes from Life, 
as spirit comes from God. And when " the spirit of 
God " moved upon the face of the depths — upon the 
face of all the earth — at whatever stage in the progress 
of our planet, from its original form to its present myr- 
iad-thronged condition of life, that transcendent event 
occurred, Nature, as we half-idolatrously worship her, 
received her first baptism of life, and her solemn con- 
secration as " the vicar of God." No wonder, then, that 
at that ecstatic moment, when the ineffably bright man- 
tle, fringed with " the white radiance of eternity," fell 
upon her, " the morning stars sang together and all the 



DISTRIBUTION AND VITALITY OF SEEDS. 12 1 

sons of God shouted for joy." And nature has been 
true to both her baptism and her consecration. She 
claims no worship, no adoration, no idolatrous homage 
from man, but continually sends up her eternal chant 
and choral anthem of praise to the great Giver of life. 
Every flower of the field, every blade of grass, every 
stream that mirrors the heavens above her, every moun- 
tain top from which she points an index finger, every 
breeze in which she whispers, and every cataract in 
which she speaks, all proclaim the power, the wisdom, 
the goodness of God — the source of all life in the uni- 
verse, from the minutest spore to all-inventive, soul- 
endowed man. 



CHAPTER V. 

PLANT MIGRATION AND INTER GLACIAL PERIODS. 

AMONG the leading propositions laid down by 
Arthur Renfrey, Esq., F. R. S. etc., etc., in the 
able article prepared by him for " The Physical Atlas of 
Natural Phenomena/' by Alexander Keith Johnston, 
Edinburg Edition, 1856, on " The Geographical Distri- 
bution of the most Important Plants Yielding Food," 
are the following : — 

1. "The primary condition of the existence of any 
species of plant, is its absolute creation, of which we 
know nothing. 

2. " But we assume each species to have been created 
but once in time and in place, and that its present diffu- 
sion is the result of its own law of reproduction under 
the favorable or restrictive influences of laws external 
to it * 

* The necessity of turning plants and animals into " tramps" is just as 
great in the case of " Evolution " as in that of " specific creation in pairs." 
In both cases, we must insist upon geneological consanguinity. For the 
chances of any two highly specialized forms, originally starting on different 
lines of divergence, and ultimately reaching individual identity, both in form 
and characteristics, is an impossible problem in the determination of chances. 
Consequently, Mr. Darwin finds the necessity of accounting for the pres- 
ence of northern forms in the southern hemisphere, and the reverse, just as 
great as in the Linnsean theory, which was fully accepted by Cuvier. 



PLA N T MIGRA TION, INTER GLA CIA L PERIOD S. 1 2 3 

" 3. The most important of external laws are those 
relating to climate, since any species can flourish only 
within narrower or wider \ but always fixed limits, of tem- 
perature, humidity etc., 

4. " The climate depends primarily on latitude, since 
this indicates distance from the source of heat, and the 
degree of obliquity of the heating rays." 

There are other governing conditions, of course, such 
as the average rain-fall, distance from the equator, the 
elevation above the sea level in the various mountain 
systems of vegetation, etc., including the hygrometric, 
thermometric, telluric, and other conditions, of the 
several localities in which the different species of vege- 
tation make their appearance. 

But why should this distinguished naturalist insist 
upon the specific creation of either plants or animals? 
No scientific work of any paramount value confines the 
creative power of the universe to such narrow and re- 
stricted limits. Nor is there a particle of evidence to be 
drawn from the Bible that either plants or animals pri- 
marily originated in pairs. " Let the earth bring forth " 
is a command without limitation, or restriction, as to 
time, place, or number; and there is no reason to doubt 
that myriads of living forms swarmed everywhere, at first 
as now, in nature. 

The idea, as expressed by Mr. Renfrey, that they 
were specifically created at one time and place only, 
whether in pairs, tens, twenties, or hundreds, is neither 



124 TRUE GENESIS. 

a rational one, nor has it any experience-argument or 
scientific authority on which to stand. Take, for in- 
stance, an experience-argument directly in point : — 
When the salt wells were first bored at Syracuse, N. Y., 
and the salt water was suffered to flow in waste over the 
low grounds about the salt-works, the small saline plants 
peculiar to salt-marshes in the warm temperate zone 
made their appearance, not in pairs, tens or hundreds, 
but in thousands rather, and have flourished there ever 
since. They came because conditions favored ; because a 
salt-marsh had been artificially produced hundreds of 
miles away from the sea coast. This is only one of a 
large number of cases — more than we have room to 
specify in this connection — showing that wherever man, 
artificially or otherwise, produces the necessary conditions 
of plant-life, nature responds to the germinal law pre- 
cisely as she did millions of years ago when the first salt- 
marsh favored the appearance of these saline plants — 
such as grow under no other conditions or circumstances. 
But this idea of plants coming primarily from a single 
pair of progenitors, and each primordial pair branching 
off into diversified offspring, as in the case of the cabbage, 
assumed to be the original ancestor of all the turnips 
and ruta-bagas, may be an article of botanical faith, but 
never of experimental proof. " Entia non sunt multiple 
canda prceter necessitates " is an old and well-approved 
maxim, applicable alike to the countless myriads of living 
.organisms, as to the innumerable crystalline forms to be 



PLAXT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 1 25 

found everywhere in nature. Nothing is produced 
without the necessary conditions on which its production 
depends. " Necessity," in its primitive signification, is a 
term of the very widest meaning, and most universal 
application. It applies as well to the course of nature as 
to the course of human events — to the laws of vegetable 
and animal growth as to the inevitable march and order 
of celestial movements. As applied to any form of life- 
manifestation it implies a law of development and growth, 
as well as the physiological conditions without which 
vital manifestations are impossible. For law, in a physi- 
ological sense, is that mode of vital action by which 
effects are invariably and inevitably produced.* And 
this law is just as dependent on necessary vital conditions 
as vital manifestations are dependent on a physiological 
law. There must always be this reciprocal dependence 
and relationship between conditioning causes and effects. 
Whenever and wherever the necessary vital conditions 
exist, the physiological law takes effect, and the requisite 
vital manifestation is witnessed. And this is no doubt 
as true of animal as of vegetable life. 

The earth's surface has been divided into eight sepa- 

* Burdach, in his " Traite ' de Physiologie" {Trad, par Jourdan. 1837) 
says : " Effectivement nous rencontrons des traces de vie dans toute exis- 
tence quelconque." This is as broad a panspermic statement as can be 
made, and is only true of inorganic matter so far as vegetable life is con- 
cerned, including such infusorial, mycologic, and cryptogamic forms as may 
lie so near to the " force vegetative " of Needham as to be indistinguishable 
from it. 



126 TRUE GENESIS. 

rate zones, each of which is distinguished by its peculiar 
or characteristic fauna and flora. Their order, measured 
from the geographical equator, is as follows ; 

I. The Equatorial Zone, extending from o° to 15 . 



Tropical " 
Sub-tropical " 
Warm Temperate 
Cold 

Sub-arctic " 
Arctic " 

Polar 



15° l< 


23 


23° " 


34 


34°" 


45 c 


45° " 


58 


58° " 


66 


66° " 


72 


72 " 


82 c 



These several zones become sixteen in number when 
considered with reference to both the northern and 
southern hemispheres. And a like division of isother- 
mals is made in the case of all our mountain systems, 
extending in both directions from the equator. In as- 
cending our equatorial, tropical, and sub-tropical moun- 
tains, we find, of course, at their several bases, the tem- 
perature of the zones in which they respectively lie ; 
from two thousand to three thousand feet, we reach the 
next higher zone, and so on, at about the same ratio 
of altitude, until we ascend to the polar zone or the 
line of perpetual ice and snow. The peak of Teneriffe, 
for instance, lies in the sub-tropical zone, but, at the ele- 
vation named, we meet with the vegetation which char- 
acterizes the warm temperate zone. And this holds 
true of all our mountain systems, in all latitudes, and 
at all altitudes, in all parts of the globe. 

They all present the same or strikingly similar char- 



PLANT MIGRA TION % INTERGLA CIAL PERIODS. \ 2 J 

acteristics in plant life, with such variations and modifi- 
cations only as might be accounted for, were all the in- 
fluencing conditions and surrounding circumstances, modi- 
fying geographical distribution, known to us. From the 
lowest to the highest regions in which vegetation flour- 
ishes, this rule, with slight exceptions only, will be found 
to obtain, and it is in this direction that the observations 
of the scientific, as well as practical botanist, should 
hereafter be extended. 

Humboldt noticed this characteristic feature of the 
earth's vegetation quite early in his explorations, and 
accordingly divided the tropical mountains, as the earth's 
surface was then divided, into three separate zones, the 
tropical, the temperate, and the frigid. But a closer 
classification now distinguishes them into the same num- 
ber of zones as are marked, in approximate isotherms, on 
the earth's surface. Mr. Renfrey gives us further stat- 
istics of great value respecting these several plant zones 
of the globe, all of which fit so admirably into our 
theory of plant-distribution, that we can hardly see how 
the most prejudiced mind can resist the force of its 
application. Among the most important of these statis- 
tical facts are tables giving the comparative rain-falls in 
the different plant zones of the old and new worlds, 
and the classes of vegetation peculiar to each of them. 

The Equatorial zone, for instance, is characterized by 
extreme luxuriance in growth, owing no doubt to the 
great heat and abundant moisture therein, and exhibits 



128 TRUE GENESIS. 

a vegetation which is peculiar to itself, and which could 
only thrive under the hygrometric, thermometric, telluric, 
and other conditions of that extensive zone. 

The Tropical zones (those north and south of the 
equator) are characterized by a more abundant and di- 
versified underwood, and, while retaining some of the 
equatorial forms, present fewer parasites and less rapid 
and luxuriant growths. They contain many plants and 
trees which are peculiar to their own limits, and these 
are generally the hardiest and most abundant. All 
equatorial forms disappear in these zones, that is do not 
pass into the sub-tropical zones. And these characteris- 
tics obtain in both the northern and southern tropical 
zones, as well as in the mountain systems within the 
equatorial regions. 

The Sub-tropical zones, while retaining some of the 
more marked forms and general features of the tropical 
zones, such as palms, bananas, etc., exhibit the most 
striking characteristics of their own, consisting of a 
greater abundance of forest trees, especially those having 
broad, leathery and shining leaves, like the magnolias, 
the different species of laurels, and plants of the myrtle 
family. The tropical forms all disappear in these zones, 
as the equatorial do in the tropical zones. 

The Warm Temperate zones exhibit the same dispo- 
sition to retain some of the hardier and more abundant 
sub-tropical forms that characterize the other zones, in 
respect to their adjoining isotherms, But the trees and 



PLANT MIGRA TION, INTERGLA CIAL PERIODS. \ 2 g 

plants peculiar to this zone north, (and the same is no 
doubt true of the corresponding zone south), are more 
numerous, and embrace a wider range of deciduous, as 
well as evergreen growths. Evergreen shrubs, heaths, 
cistusses, and leguminous plants are everywhere more 
abundant. The marked characteristic of these zones is 
that the trees, plants, and arborescent grasses differ more 
w T idely in their general character, as well as run more 
extensively into varieties. 

The Cold Temperate zones retain many of the de- 
ciduous trees of the warm temperate, but with less con- 
spicuous blossoms, while a stronger tendency is shown 
toward social conifers, and the trunks of the deciduous 
trees are more profusely overrun with mosses, lichens, 
etc. These zones are also abundant in grasses. 

The Sub-arctic zone north largely retains its hold 
upon the social conifers, giving place, northward, on this 
continent, as well as in Europe and Asia, to birch and 
alder, alternating with willows where the soil is suffi- 
ciently moist. Green pastures are still abundant, and 
showy flowering herbs abound during the brief spring, 
summer, and autumn months. 

The Arctic zone retains few of the sub-arctic forms 
and its vegetation generally corresponds to what we call 
alpine shrubs, grasses, etc. 

The North Polar zone shows few signs of vegetation 
and is thought to be entirely devoid of shrubs. A few 
small herbacious perennials of the most extreme dwarf 



130 TRUE GENESIS. 

habit, with a few lichens and mosses, constitute its entire 
vegetation. 

There are some seeming exceptions to these general 
statements respecting plant-distribution, but they are 
hardly exceptions when we consider the elevation at 
which any one species, as the birches for instance, 
may appear, as they frequently do, in three several 
zones. 

From these facts, gathered from the highest authori- 
ties, and well-attested on all hands, what general conclu- 
sions, if any, are to be drawn ? Before answering this 
inquiry, let us proceed to state what conclusions have 
been drawn. According to all the authorities we have 
examined on the distribution of plant life ; on the migra- 
tion of plants and animals ; on climate and time as affect- 
ing the transference of isothermal and isochimenal lines ; 
on glacial and inter-glacial periods (with one important ex- 
ception only), the assumption maintained is substantially 
that of Mr. Renfrey, that " each species of plant and 
animal was created but once in time and place/' and that 
its present diffusion is the result of its " own law of re- 
production under the favorable or restrictive influences 
of laws external to it." In other words, they insist upon 
original plant-centres, without definitely stating when or 
where they occurred, and that from these centres both 
plants and animals have migrated to all parts of the globe 
where they now appear, even crossing the equatorial 
zones where they could not live for a single day. This 



PLANT MIGRATION. INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 



131 



migration theory they attempt to explain in a way that is 
altogether more ingenious than satisfactory. 

The important exception to which we refer is that of 
Professor Agassiz, as reported by his associate professor 
of Harvard University, Mr. Asa Gray, in his " Essays and 
Reviews Pertaining to Darwinism/' In this work Pro- 
fessor Gray says of his late distinguished associate, that 
so far as he was aware, Professor Agassiz was the only 
leading naturalist " who did not take into his very con- 
ception of a species, explicitly or by implication, the 
notion of a material connection resulting from the descent 
of the individuals composing it from a common stock, of 
a local origin. " 

And Professor Gray adds this further testimony to 
the closeness of his associate's observations, in consider- 
ing the very point here under consideration : " Agassiz 
wholly eliminates community of descent from his idea of 
species, and even conceives a species to have been as 
numerous in individuals, and as widely spread over space, 
or as segregated in discontinuous spaces, from the first 
to the later periods." And this view is undoubtedly the 
correct one. At all events, it entirely harmonizes with 
the facts of the biblical genesis, and obviates the neces- 
sity of accounting for the appearance of the same genera 
and species of plants or animals in the southern as in 
the northern hemispheres ; in fact, their appearance in all 
parts of the globe, in corresponding isotherms, and under 
similar conditions of moisture and soil-constituents. 



I32 TRUE GENESIS. 

Wherever the hygrometric, thermometric, telluric, 
and other conditions favor, the class of vegetation indi- 
cated by the presence of these conditions makes its ap- 
pearance, just as the fire-weed makes its appearance in 
our warm temperate zone, not from the presence of seed, 
but simply the presence of " conditions " — the /revision 
of man harmonizing with the /revision of nature. In 
the same way the " Japan clover " made its appearance, 
as Professor Thurber states, " all over the southern 
states" during the late civil war, not from the migration 
of plants, but the presence of natural conditions.* 

The numerous facts we have already given, and many 
others that might be arrayed in advocacy of our position, 
taken in connection with the general facts here presented 
in regard to plant-distribution, all point directly to 
climatal and soil conditions as the real cause of dissem- 
ination, and not to their migration from continent to 
continent, and across vast intervening seas and oceans, 

* In the case of volcanic islands, the upheavals were undoubtedly ac- 
companied by deposits of mud, sand (ocean detritus), marine vegetation, 
and more or less animal matter, and these organic substances were washed 
down by the rains into the broken valleys and plains below, when land veg- 
etation almost immediately made its appearance ; not because seeds may 
have drifted thither by any of the different agencies that have been men- 
tioned, but because organic matter can no more help bringing forth life in 
some form, when conditions favor, than salt water, when exposed to evapora- 
tion, can help crystallizing into its symmetrically-arranged salts. And the 
same would be true of all the coral islands, bringing up the organic matter 
of the sea to the influence of the light, the rains, and the dews. The 
islands thus formed in the Pacific Ocean begin to exhibit vegetable life 
almost as soon as they make their appearance above the reefs, and a line of 
sea-beach is formed about them. 



PLANT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 



133 



as the theory of Professor Gray and others would require 
us to believe. Take the case of the Schizcea pusilla of the 
New Jersey pine barrens, to which we have already re- 
ferred, growing in similar barrens in New Zealand, and 
how are we to account for their antipodal appearance 
upon the globe ? Professor Thurber refers to this plant 
as a " purely local fern " of New Jersey, and says it was 
for a long time supposed to be peculiar to that state 
until it was ascertained that it grew in New Zealand. 
Whether this plant " travelled " from New Zealand to 
New Jersey, or journeyed in the opposite direction, none 
of these " specific-centre " gentlemen can well inform us. 
Professor Agassiz would have said that it might have 
appeared, in numerous individuals, in both localities at 
the same time, or at different times, as conditions fa- 
vored ; and this would have been an exact scientific 
statement, no doubt, of the fact. Mr. Arthur Renfrey, 
and those who accept his scientific formulae, must insist 
that this most beautiful of all our ferns was such a 
" favorite child of nature " that she condescended to create 
it twice " in time and place," instead of only once. It is a 
poor rule, they may say, that has no exceptions in phe- 
nomenal manifestation. 

Professor Gray may insist that such a phenomenon 
as this requires belief in the supernatural, and that 
migration by ocean-currents is the more rational theory 
of the two. But M. Alphonse de Candelle — quite as 
high authority as we can quote — has come to the conclu- 



134 TRUE GENESIS. 

sion that marine currents, and all other suggested means 
of distant transportation, " have played only a very small 
part in the actual dispersion of species/' even across nar- 
row channels and the near arms of seas. But why should 
the appearance of this fern at opposite points of the 
globe, with thousands of miles of ocean and continent 
intervening, be any more supernatural than the presence 
of Bacteria or Toruloe* in different organic infusions? 
If the vital units of these infusoria, are present in ex- 
perimental infusion, as Professor Bastian virtually admits, 
why may not the vital germs or units of this Schizcea 
pusilla have made their appearance, in developmental 
forms, both in New Zealand and New Jersey, at the 
same or different periods of time ? If Professor Gray 
regards the microscopical forms in organic infusions, or 
the statical forms in inorganic solutions, as supernatural, 
or as above the powers of nature, then we have no 
exceptions to make to his position. First, prove that 
these vital manifestations of nature are above the 
powers with which she has been endowed, or was origi- 
nally endowed and we will concede the question of 
supernaturalness, and drop all exceptions to his line of 
argument. Whenever a dynamic law, or a statical, is 

* These, while presenting the most varied and diverse forms of infuso- 
rial life, are nevertheless the most constant and abundant type. They 
abound more or less in all organic infusions. Ehrenberg, however, holds 
that they are no more animal than vegetal forms. They vary in length 
from Yg-thjo to Winr °f an mcn > an( l are consequently too minute to be satis- 
factorily classified in respect to all their diversified characteristics. 



PLANT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 135 

found to be uniformly operative under a given set of 
conditions, we had supposed the operation not to be 
above the powers of nature, but in entire accord with 
them, and hence not supernatural. 

But let us see into what an inextricable labyrinth of 
difficulty we are led by this theory of plant-migration 
from the equatorial to the sub-arctic zone, and vice versa, 
and even beyond the equator to the sub-antarctic zone, 
and still vice versa. Before proceeding to consider the 
probable duration of the several geographical epochs, 
called glacial periods, on which their theory of plant- 
migration depends, or considering the evidence touching 
these glacial periods, we will state their position in regard 
to these possible migrations as briefly and concisely as we 
know how. Mr, Darwin's solution of this problem is the 
generally accepted one of the evolutionists, as well as 
most of the present scientific world. As the truth, or 
rather the falsity, of his pet theory of evolution depended 
on the satisfactory solution of this vexed problem, it be- 
came necessary for him to give his best and entire mental 
energies to the gigantic task which was, by universal con- 
sent, assigned him. The reader shall see how admirably 
the thermal equator is crossed by Mr. Darwin, with his 
vast swarms of flies, mosquitoes, insectivorous and other 
plants, forest trees, anthropoid apes, and general menage- 
rie of wild animals, such as would gladden the heart of 
the " great American showman " beyond the most ex- 
travagant comparison. 



136 TRUE GENESIS. 

The question, bear in mind, which he was specially 
called upon to solve, was how the temperate forms north 
— those, for instance, of the warm and cold temperate 
zones — managed to cross the thermal equator, and invade 
the corresponding zones in the southern hemisphere ; just 
as though there was any more necessity of determining 
this question than the opposite one, of how the southern 
forms came to invade the northern hemisphere. We will 
give his solution of this problem in his own language, 
that we may not be charged with misrepresentation. 

He says, in speaking of the glacial periods : " As the 
cold became more and more intense, we know that arctic 
forms invaded the temperate regions ; and, from the 
facts just given, there can hardly be a doubt that some 
of the more vigorous, dominant, and widest-spread tem- 
perate forms invaded the equatorial lowlands. The in- 
habitants (flora and fauna) of these hot lowlands would 
at the same time have migrated to the tropical and sub- 
tropical regions of the south ; for the southern hemis- 
phere was at this period warmer. On the decline of 
the glacial period, as both hemispheres gradually re- 
covered their former temperatures, the northern forms 
living on the lowlands under the equator would have 
been driven to their former homes or have been de- 
stroyed, being replaced by the equatorial forms return- 
ing from the south. Some, however, of the northern 
temperate forms would almost certainly have ascended 
any adjoining highland, where, if sufficiently lofty, 



PLA X T MIGRA TION, INTERGLA CIAL PERIODS. \ 3 7 

they would have long survived, like the arctic forms on 
the mountains of Europe. 

" In the regular course of events the southern hem- 
isphere would, in its turn, be subject to a severe glacial 
period, with the northern hemisphere rendered warmer ; 
and then the southern temperate forms would invade 
the equatorial lowlands. The northern forms w r hich had 
before been left on the mountains would now descend 
and mingle with the southern forms. These latter, when 
the warmth returned, w r ould return to their former 
homes, leaving some few species on the mountains, and 
carrying southward with them some of the northern 
temperate forms, which had descended from their moun- 
tain fastnesses. Thus we should have some few species 
identically the same in the northern and southern tem- 
perate zones, and on the mountains of the intermediate 
tropical regions." 

We are sorry to spoil so ingenious a theory as this 
to account for plant-migration from the temperate zones 
north to the corresponding zones south. But in spite 
of all the great names which will frown down upon us 
in the attempt, we are obliged to demolish this altitudi- 
ness structure, even at the risk of its tumbling about 
our own ears. 

But first let us lay down a few undeniable proposi- 
tions, on the strength of which this ingenious and purely 
speculative theory of Mr. Darwin must rest: — 

1. It is universally conceded by the scientific world 



I38 TRUE GENESIS. 

that these glacial epochs, however many of them there 
may have been in the past and however few there may 
be in the future, depend, for their occurrence, upon the 
maxima of eccentricity in the earth's orbit about the sun. 

2. The actual amount of heat which the earth annu- 
ally receives from the sun is in no way affected by the 
eccentricity of its orbit. It is a constant quantity, and 
only unequally distributed on the earth's surface, being 
neither increased nor diminished, as our winters occur 
in aphelion or perihelion. 

3. The actual amount of ice-cap accumulated about 
the two poles of the earth, is also a constant quantity. 
And to measure the severity of any glacial epoch, we 
have only to determine the exact amount of ice (not 
altogether an impossible problem) about the two poles 
at any given time, and then determine the effect cf 
its entire transference from one pole to the other. 

4. It is not probable that the present ice-cap of the 
south pole extends continuously and permanently much 
farther north than 8o° or 8i°. Mt. Erebus, in Victoria 
Land, lies in about this latitude, and it was only a few 
years since that the coast line of that island or conti- 
nent was traversed, by English exploring vessels, from 
Mt. Erebus to a point some ten or twelve degrees further 
north.* 

* The extent of the southern ice-cap may at least be approximately 
reached from explorations already made. Capt. Weddell, in 1823, extended 
his explorations southward to within about 15 of the south pole, where he 
found an open sea. Capt. Ross, in 1842, approached to within about 13 



PLANT MIGRA TIOJV, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 139 

5. But if we estimate the southern cap as extending 
continuously to 75°, what would be the effect of its 
transference at once to the ice-cap of the north pole ? 
Would it extend jt, after assuming its proper glacial 
slope, below 6o°, a point falling w T ithin the present sub- 
arctic zone ? The utmost limit to which Mr. Croll, in 
his great work on " Climate and Time," conceives it 
possible that it should extend, in any glacial epoch, is 
to 55°, or about the northern boundary of England. 

Now unless the astronomers and physicists are all at 
sea about the causes of glaciation, the warm temperate 
zone can never be pushed any further south than the 
tropical zone, nor the cold temperate any further than 
the sub-tropical, This would be the extreme limit. 
Mr. Croll says, in speaking of these glacial periods ; " It 
is, of course, absurd to suppose that an ice-cap could 
ever actually reach down to the equator. It is prob- 
able that the last great ice-cap of the glacial epoch 
nowhere reached half way to the equator. Our cap 
(that of Europe) must therefore, terminate at a mod- 
erately high latitude." And if the gulf stream flows 

of the same pole, without serious obstruction. It is true that, in the follow- 
ing year, he encountered ice barriers near the line of the antarctic circle, 
but they were floating barriers coming down from Weddell's open sea. 
Capt. Wilkes, in 1840, explored a considerable portion of the Antarctic 
Continent, lying almost entirely within the antarctic circle. Other explora- 
tions have been made, showing that the southern ice-cap does not probably 
extend, continuously at least, much farther north than 78 or 8o°, or to with- 
in some ten or twelve degrees of the south pole, independently of the packs 
of drifting ice in the otherwise open seas. 



140 



TRUE GENESIS. 



southward during the glacial period north, as he sup- 
poses probable, the cap on this continent would proba- 
bly terminate at the same moderately high latitude. 
Assuming that Mr. Croll's estimate is the more proba- 
ble one, it would only push the cold temperate zone 
down to the line of the Gulf States ; the warm tem- 
perate, to the southern line of Mexico ; the sub-tropical, 
to the Central American States, and the tropical to the 
United States of Columbia, Venezuela, and Guiana. 

Suppose, then, that some seven hundred thousand 
years ago, more or less, when the North Pole had fully 
donned the earth's ice-cap, with all the isothermal and 
isochimenal changes thereby effected, what must have 
been the line of march taken by our northern vegetal 
and animal forms to escape the cataclysm of ice and 
snow then impending ? Manifestly, they would have 
flocked, first to the Gulf states, then to Mexico, and 
afterwards to the Central American states ; but none 
of them could ever have been crowded through the 
Isthmus of Panama, since at the height of the last gla- 
ciation, that portion of the continent must have been 
the tropical barrier to our northern forms, as it is now 
the equatorial barrier. 

For the sake of the argument, however, we will sup- 
pose the northern ice-cap to have been even more im- 
perative in its demands than Mr. Croll has deemed pos- 
sible, driving some of our warm and cold temperate 
forms down into the lowlands of Colombia, Venezuela, 



PLANT MIGRA TION % INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 141 

etc., in the extreme northern portions of South America. 
But how would these forms have managed, even then, 
to cross the thermal equator and secure a permanent 
habitat in the present warm and cold temperate zones 
of that continent ? Manifestly, this question has never 
been practically solved, nor is it ever likely to be in 
our day or generation. It is nevertheless susceptible of 
solution, as Mr. Darwin thinks, by easy mental processes. 
We have only to take a bird's eye view of the situation, 
and mentally follow these forms in their long geographi- 
cal tramp from the northern to the southern hemisphere. 
They must have started, of course, some twenty 
thousand years or more before the earth reached its 
last superior limit of eccentricity. At that distant epoch 
the sub-arctic breezes must have been blowing pretty 
stiffly in our present temperate latitudes, and these forms 
would have been constrained, in due time, to seek a 
more congenial isotherm. They must accordingly have 
set out on their expedition, at about the period in- 
dicated, with the prospect of a long and tedious journey 
before them. Some twenty thousand years must have 
transpired before they reached the line of the present 
Gulf states, and it would have taken as many more 
years for them to deploy to the right and successfully 
enter the Mexican states. In another twenty thousand 
years or so they might have doubled Vera Cruz, and 
headed, in a southeasterly direction, for the Central 
American states. The thermal equator would by this 



142 TRUE GENESIS. 

time have reached a point some thirty degrees south 
of the geographical equator, while the northern ice- 
cap would have swept down upon the traditional " hub 
of the universe/' or some ten or twelve degrees in ex- 
cess of Mr. Croll's calculations. 

To have accomplished this grand glaciatorial feat the 
North Pole must have donned some twenty times the 
amount of ice now about both poles of the earth, and so 
changed the earth's centre of gravity as to have inun- 
dated every foot of land on its habitable surface. But if 
this terrible catastrophy had been avoided, and some of 
our extreme northern forms had forced their way through 
the Isthmus into the lowlands of Columbia, they must 
have done so at their greatest possible peril, even if 
they had reached the base of Old Mt. Tolima in advance 
of the thermal equator, now fleeing in dismay before the 
southern Ice-monarch, with all his isochimenal hosts in 
mad pursuit of their invaders. And if these adventurous 
northern forms had succeeded in ascending Mt. Tolima, 
they could never have got down again, with the assist- 
ance of forty glaciations. 

But we can imagine Mr. Darwin promptly snatching 
his pen to show the stupidity of these northern forms in 
not climbing Popocatepetl or some other lofty mountain 
in Central America or Mexico, on their retreat before the 
still advancing thermal equator. But how this would 
have helped them to cross the geographical equator, we 
fail to see. When Mr. Darwin, and the eminent corps of 



PLANT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 1 43 

geologists and physicists accepting his solution of this 
"vexed question," can make a "warm term" south 
succeed a. " cold term " north, we shall have no difficulty 
in solving the problem ourself. But, unfortunately, the 
two terms — the cold one north and the warm one south 
— are simultaneous in occurrence, and the same causes 
which forced these northern invaders into the tropics, 
when they followed after the thermal equator, would 
have driven them ignominously back again before it, 
The climbing of mountains would only have prolonged 
their disaster. For after the glaciation north comes the 
glaciation south, and unless our cold temperate zone 
were pushed down beyond the geographical equator, 
none of its living forms could ever have reached the cor- 
responding zone in the southern hemisphere. 

But as this " migration theory " is one of paramount 
importance to modern science, and especially to " Dar- 
winism, 46, distinctively so called, let us, at the risk of 

* The truth or falsity of " Evolution " depends entirely on the success- 
ful solution of this problem, for the chances are quintillions to ones that no 
two identical forms could have originated from different centres, or from 
the same centre on divergent lines, and ever reached identically the same 
results. And how any two forms should happen to be sexually paired, on 
the same or different lines of divergence, is one of those inexplicable mys- 
teries which must puzzle Herbert Spencer in all his labyrinthian searches 
into " Fore-correlation," "Differentiation," u the Dynamic Force of Mole- 
cules," etc., etc. However successful he may be in other directions, he 
will inevitably fail in this. We must fall back on the grand Old Bible gen- 
sis for the solution of this difficulty, where every living thing was com- 
manded to produce seed, or multiply and replenish the waters and the earth 
with offspring. 



144 TRUE GENESIS. 

repetition and tediousness, propose a scientific expedition 
for the better solution of this problem. To do this, we 
propose to cut loose from our stupid predecessors, the 
plants and animals, and invite Mr. Darwin and some of 
his more distinguished European contemporaries, not 
omitting Professors Gray, Winchell, Yeomans, and some 
few other American admirers of his, to accompany us on 
a fresh expedition from the warm and cold temperate 
zones north to the corresponding zones south, purely in 
the interest of science. To make it certain that the time 
fixed upon for this " expedition'* to start, will not escape 
their attention, we will state, what many of them already 
well know, that the present eccentricity of the earth's 
orbit is very low, being only 0.0168, and that, in the year 
of our Lord 851.800, it will reach its next superior limit, 
with a few intervening oscillations of such minimum 
value as to render it hardly worth our while to start 
before that time. 

We shall be obliged, of course to invite our distin- 
guished European party to join us on this side of the At- 
lantic, as their own narrow and contracted continent 
furnishes no proper field for determining the problem in 
question. We shall insist upon one condition only : 
" That they shall never leave the zvarm temperate zone in 
which ive shall set out on our expedition, except to pass 
halfway into an adjoining Bone as is the habit, at times, 
with plants and animals!' This condition will have to be 
rigidly observed, otherwise our expedition would be of no 



PLANT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 145 

scientific value to future generations. As we shall have 
plenty of time to provide the necessary outfit, we will 
appoint Mr. Darwin purveyor-general of the party, and 
hold him responsible for any misadventure. 

We will arrange for the expedition to start in the 
early autumn of the year of our Lord 831,800, or about 
twenty thousand years before the earth shall reach its 
next superior limit of eccentricity,— all of us eager, of 
course, to brave the climatic vicissitudes of the journey, 
and to solve the " great problem of the ages," which is, 
to determine how the gigantic elephantoids of the 
Eocene period managed to cross the thermal equator, 
and pass into the present arctic regions of our globe. 

As " the king never dies/ so the old southern Ice- 
monarch will be succeeded by the young northern one, 
at about the period named. We shall then have a de- 
cided advantage over our predecessors, the plants and 
animals, in their journey southward, since w r e shall know 
the exact route they took, and need only follow it. Pre- 
sumably they had no such information, nor had they 
either chart or compass to guide them, — a circumstance 
which Mr. Darwin has not sufficiently taken into ac- 
count in predicating intelligence of his favorite pedes- 
trians. Besides, these vegetal and animal forms had one 
difficulty to encounter which we shall not experience. 
With all the northern forms driven down into the Cen- 
tral American states, they must have been sadly crowded 
for room, especially near the Isthmus. The social coni- 



146 TRUE GENESIS. 

fers must have monopolized all the more favored sites on 
the mountain sides and tops, while the humbler denizens 
of the forest must have contented themselves with still 
more limited quarters. The more impatient animals, for 
lack of necessary forage, must have crowded through the 
Isthmus only to be driven back by the tropical heats to 
their proper isotherms. 

But our warm temperate zone is now moving south- 
ward, and our scientific expedition is moving with it. 
The northern Ice-monarch has resumed absolute sway, 
and our aphelion distance from the sun has increased 
some tens millions of miles. We have, in the mean 
time, moved down to the line of the Gulf states, and are 
deploying to the right in order to make a triumphant 
entry into Mexico. Mr. Darwin is daily consulting the 
isochimenals, and is confident that our northern ice-cap 
will equal Mr. Croirs highest expectations. The news 
finally reaches us that the Gulf stream has turned its 
course southward, and is now pouring its immense trea- 
sures of heat into the South Altantic, if not turning the 
African " horn " and washing the far-off Australian coast. 
This fact greatly increases the enthusiasm of our Euro- 
pean party, and they hasten forward into the sub-tropical 
zone, almost " violating conditions " in their haste to en- 
ter the tropics. 

At length, we crowd the narrow passages of the Isth- 
mus, and the glory of a warm temperate climate bursts 
upon our view in the Columbian states of South America. 



PLANT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 1 47 

The expedition promises to be an entire success. At least, 
Mr. Darwin thinks so, and he is now the Sir Oracle of our 
party. We deliberately enter the lowlands of Colum- 
bia, and make ready to ascend the sub-tropical mountains 
— those formerly equatorial — where the " great scientific 
problem of the ages" is to be demonstrated. But we 
are measuring time by almost Sirius distances, and vast 
geologic periods sweep by without apparent record. The 
northern ice-cap has been a prodigious one, crowding us 
nearly down to the geographical equator, with the ad- 
vantage we have of appropriating some five and half 
degrees of the sub-tropical zone. 

But the year iVnno Domini 851,800 finally rolls 
round, and the maximum of the earth's ice-cap is 
reached. Old Mt. Tolima looms up in the distance, 
and we soon ascertain that its height is sufficient for 
all scientific purposes. Its summit displays a glitter- 
ing ice-cap, and we are certain to find the proper is- 
otherm by climbing its umbrageous sides. We accord- 
ingly make haste to reach its base, and get there not 
a minute too soon ; for the young southern Ice-monarch 
has stolen a march on the thermal equator, and is driv- 
ing it irresistibly back to its old quarters. His march 
northward is a continuous triumph and ovation up to 
55°, and the heart of Patagonia is made glad by his 
near approach. True, the white gates of commerce 
are closed about the Horn ; but that is no concern 
of these wild Patagonians. The aggressive Britton is 



I48 TRUE GENESIS. 

driven out of New Zealand, and that is another source 
of joy to the savage breast. Tasmania would extend 
a gladder welcome than all to the Ice-crowned mon- 
arch, but alas, not a drop of Tasmanian blood runs in 
human veins ! Cape Good Hope has now a sub-arctic 
climate, and the heart of the wild Kaffir and Zulu 
rejoices that the sceptre of " perfidious Albion " is 
broken. 

The thermal equator at length reaches the base of 
Mt. Tolima, and hastens northward to the Isthmus, 
and thence to Hondurus and New Guatemala, where, 
by sheer force of exhaustion, it comes to a halt. 

But, as the equatorial zone extends fifteen degrees 
both ways from the thermal equator, its southern limit 
now rests on the geographical equator, and accordingly 
encircles the base of our " mount of refuge." We are 
now up this mountain some sixteen thousand feet 
above the equatorial lowlands, with the sub-tropical, 
tropical, and equatorial zones between us and the pos- 
sibility of our further migration southward, without 
violating the express conditions imposed at the outset 
of our expedition. 

The fact soon stares us in the face that we have 
been no more successful, in our efforts to cross the 
thermal equator and pass into high southern latitudes, 
than the stupid plants and animals before us ; and Mr- 
Darwin's faith in high mountains springing from equa- 
torial lowlands, disappears in jest and derision as we 



PLAXT MIGRATION, INTERGLACIAL PERIODS. 149 

all good-humoredly agree " to break conditions, " and 
find our way back to the centres of activity and trade 
in the Old and New Worlds, leaving the great scientific 
problem of the ages to solve itself as best it may. We 
accordingly descend from our mountain fastness, hasten 
to the coast, and take passage by steamer to Manhat- 
tan, the great commercial metropolis of the world. 
Here we find that the barometer of exchange was 
long ago taken down in London and hung up in New 
York. The Old Antiquarian Society rooms are the first 
object of interest sought by us. On making our way 
thither we look for a copy of the Herald, of the date 
of our departure, in which we find an account of the 
scientific expedition fitted out by us, facetiously 
termed " The Great Wild-Goose Chase after the Thermal 
Equator" — presenting one of the most humorous bits 
of sensational pleasantry ever given to the American 
public. 

But an apology is due the staider reader for the 
seeming levity of this narrative adventure. The ex- 
position of Mr. Darwin, though widely accepted on 
both sides of the Atlantic by the scientific world, has 
seemed to us too trivial for serious reply. If we have 
leaped over vast periods of time, it makes no difference 
with the argument. So long as the thermal equator, 
or more properly the equatorial zone, or any part of 
it, lies between the warm or cold temperate forms, 
whether plants or animals, and their point of destina- 



150 TRUE GENESIS. 

tion in the southern hemisphere, they can never mi- 
grate thither, any more than the right whale of the 
arctic seas can swim the equatorial oceans. Nothing 
is gained by going out of the way to climb moun- 
tains, except to hopelessly retard the return of both 
plants and animals to their native zones. If we have 
not demonstrated this fact to the reader's fullest com- 
prehension, it will be useless for him ever to write a 
Q. E. D. at the end of any proposition. 

It is true that some eminent astronomers and , 
physicists hesitate to accept the theory that these gla- 
cial epochs are due to the eccentricity of the earth's 
orbit. But the argument favoring it is well fortified 
and ably advanced, and if we add to the astronomical 
considerations involved, the physical proofs of a change 
in the earth's centre of gravity, caused by the exces- 
sive accumulation of ice about either pole, and the 
probable shifting of the Gulf stream to a southerly 
direction during the glacial period north, it is difficult 
to resist the conviction that the real cause of glacia- 
tion has been suggested in this theory. With all the 
ice now accumulated about the south pole transferred 
to the north pole, it would make an ice-cap of over 
thirty miles in thickness at the pole, and one sloping 
in all directions southward to about 6o°. This accumu- 
lation, it is claimed, would so change the earth's centre 
of gravity as to cause all the equatorial warm waters 
to flow southward instead of northward, as they now do. 



PLANT MIGRA TJOjV, INTERGLA CIAL PERIODS. I 5 I 

This would certainly seem to be a most wonderful 
provision of nature, as well as one strongly calculated 
to impress the human mind with the belief that an 
Infinite Provision lies behind all possible /revision, 
whether witnessed in the heavens or in the earth, in 
astronomical or physical phenomena. Everywhere we 
see infinite perfection, combined with infinite benefi- 
cence, in the adaptation of means to ends. Nothing 
runs to waste — all things are conserved for use. 

But in all the outspoken grandeur of the universe, 
there is nothing so grand, in exhibition at least, as 
the simple faith of a child, that " He who watereth the 
hills from his chambers," and " causeth the day-spring 
to know his place," will watch over the trustful little 
sleeper during the darkness and silence of the night. 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 

PROFESSOR Gray, in his address before the Ameri- 
can Association for the advancement of science, 
delivered at Dubuque (la.) in 1872, while remarking upon 
the wide extent of similar flora in the same plant zones, 
says : "If we now compare, as to their flora generally, the 
Atlantic United States with Japan, Mantchooria and 
Northern China, — i. e. Eastern North America with 
Eastern North Asia — half the earth's circumference apart, 
we find an astonishing similarity." But why astonish- 
ing? Had our distinguished botanical professors, in this 
country and in Europe, thoroughly informed themselves 
as to the climatic conditions, the general physical fea- 
tures, geographical characteristics, soil-constituents, and 
other conditional incidences of this Asiatic region, in the 
light of all the physiological facts before them, the cir- 
cumstance of this great similarity of flora would have 
been anything but astonishing. Indeed, the astonish- 
ment, if any, would have been expressed at the want of 
similarity, had it been found to exist. 

Ever since 1862, these distinguished professors have 
had the great plant-charts of Mr. Arthur Renfrey before 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 153 

them, with the warm temperate zone north accurately 
laid down in its proper isotherms, as well as the different 
classes of vegetation peculiar to the two regions referred 
to, and some general conclusions of value to science 
might have been drawn therefrom. Besides, the fact of 
these similar antipodal flora was well known to many of 
them before this chart was issued. They also knew that 
all along the higher mountain ranges of this country, as 
well as in Europe, the same alpine flora was to be found 
under the same or similar alpine conditions. From Mt. 
St. Elias, in Alaska, to the Central American States, 
and thence, through the Isthmus, to the southern ex- 
tremity of the Andes in South Patagonia, there is one 
unbroken line of alpine vegetation pressing the sides or 
summits of the loftier mountain ranges, at altitudes 
correspondingly varying with the latitudes in which 
they occur. And the same is true of the Alps in Eu- 
rope and the Himalaya ranges in Asia, if not of all the 
mountain systems of the globe. 

These, and hundreds of other equally suggestive facts, 
all pointing to geographical, climatic, and other influen- 
cing conditions, as the real objective points of inquiry, 
have been constantly before our botanical friends ; and 
yet they have been content with Mr. Darwin's theory of 
climbing mountains to cross the geographical equator, 
under the impression that an enormous ice-cap, or rather 
prodigious " ice-ulster/' would ultimately drift them into 
the southern hemisphere, or enable them to "coast" 



154 TRUE GENESIS. 

their way thither with the greatest imaginable ease. But 
why insist upon the migration of plants growing in the 
lowlands and about the bases and sides of mountains, 
and not suggest some means of transport for the equally 
beautiful flora, known as " alpine," on the mountain 
summits of the earth? These are distributed, as we have 
before shown, over all our mountain systems, in all lati- 
tudes and in all parts of the globe, as well as in the 
higher regions of vegetation as we approach the north 
pole. Surely, the delicate little harebells of these alpine 
regions should attract some interest, if not sympathy, 
from those who are constantly hunting up means of 
transport for the more hardy and robust plants that 
seem able to take care of themselves almost anywhere. 
When the next great ice-cap shall sweep down from 
the north pole upon these beautiful alpine flowers they 
will have to travel somewhere. There is manifestly as 
much necessity for them to get out of the way as for the 
rest of the flora. How will they manage to get down the 
mountains into the lowlands, and traverse uncongenial 
plains and deserts, to find other and far-distant alpine 
homes ? They can never, of course, get very far away 
from the regions skirted by eternal frost, for their cup of 
joy must be chaliced by the snow-flake, or their beautiful 
life is soon ended. But if all our alpine flora have trav- 
eled from one evolutional centre, or have been " created 
but once in time and place," how have they managed to 
cross the thermal equator and spread themselves out 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 155 

over all the alpine regions of the globe ? We call upon 
Mr. Darwin and Professor Gray to rise and explain. Not 
that we want any explanation, but that their theory of 
plant-migration stands sadly in need of one. 

- The theory which the Bible genesis suggests to us is 
fully adequate to the explanation wanted. It explains 
not only why these alpine flora appear where they do, 
but why they cannot appear anywhere else. It also ex- 
plains all the physiological facts to which we have re- 
ferred in the foregoing chapters. Wherever the neces- 
sary alpine conditions exist the earth responds to the 
divine command, and the beautiful little alpine harebell 
is cradled into life, and rejoices in the bright embroidery 
it wears. And so, wherever streams are turned aside to 
flow through new meads and sheltered woods, or over 
broken and swaly places where cowslips never grew be- 
fore, hardly a year will pass before this " wan flower " 
will hang therein " its pensive head," while all along the 
line of the stream the black alder will make its appear- 
ance in the lowlands, no matter how far its current may 
be diverted from its original channel, or how distant the 
supply of natural seeds. For nature's sternest painter 
can only delineate her as " instinct with music and the 
vital sparks 

If our botanical professors would come forth into the 
true light of nature, they should accept the position of 
pupil to her, and not assert that of teacher. So long 
as they continue to peep and botanize upon her grave, 



1 56 TRUE GENESIS. 

or over ancient mounds and Hadrianic tumuli, they will 
never find out the cunning of her processes, much less 
the means she employs to accomplish her perfected 
ends. This modern idolatry of " hypotheses," with our 
chronic neglect of what nature does, is the great sci- 
entific stumbling-block of the age in which we live. 
Our botanists all agree that certain plants and trees 
disappear — hopelessly die out — from the absence of 
" necessary conditions;'' when will they come to re- 
cognize the reverse of this undeniable proposition, and 
agree that the presence of necessary conditions may 
cause the same plants and trees to make their appear- 
ance, that is, spring into life in obedience to some 
great primal law, as unerringly obeyed by nature as the 
attractive force of the universe itself? 

For nearly half a century the fact has been known 
that the geographical distribution of the European 
flora, and especially that of the British Islands, was 
referable to latitude, elevation, and climatic conditions. 
As early as 1835, Mr. Hewett Watson, a well-known 
botanist of that day, in his published " Remarks on the 
Geographical Distribution of Plants, in connection with 
Latitude, Elevation, and Climate," drew the attention 
of the botanical world to this remarkable feature of 
plant distribution ; while the late Professor Edward 
Forbes pursued the same line of thought in his at- 
tempt to show how geographical changes had affected 
plant areas in Great Britain as far back as the last 



DISTRIBUTIOX AXD PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. I 57 

glacial drift. And yet all our botanical writers have 
been steadily persisting on immense plant-migrations to 
account for their geographical distribution, and have 
given us maps without number to show how the vege- 
tal hosts have traversed vast continents, swam multi- 
tudinous seas, braved the fiery equator, and scaled the 
summits of the loftiest Andes. In the mean time, no 
botanist of any distinguished note, except M. De Can- 
dolle, has confidently ventured to question this migra- 
tion theory, so imposing and formidable has been the 
array of names which have frowned down, like so 
many gigantic ghauts, upon the audacious questioner. 

But the present actual state of knowledge on this 
subject forbids us any longer to accept theories for 
facts, premises for conclusions, or fallacious reasoning 
for legitimate induction. Truth and daylight never 
meet in a corner, and no one, in our day, need go to 
the bottom of a well in search of either. We are 
forever stumbling over the truth without knowing it, 
because our old traditional beliefs, like so many super- 
annuated grasshoppers, are constantly springing up in 
our path and diverting our attention from her. There 
are physiological facts enough daily obtruding them- 
selves upon our attention, if we would but notice them, 
in the case of wayside plants, garden and household 
weeds, and the more aggressive vegetation of worn out 
pasture-lands, to satisfy us of the truth of our theory, 
were it not for the swarms of these old traditional 



I58 TRUE GENESIS. 

grasshoppers continually rising into the air before us, 
and shutting out the truth as it is in nature. And the 
worst feature about this whole business is, that we have 
come to regard these multitudinous insects as a delight 
instead of a burden. 

But it is hardly necessary to pursue this subject 
further. We have shown, or shall show in the succeed- 
ing pages, that all crystalline forms come from neces- 
sary or favoring statical conditions; that all infusorial 
forms come in the same way, only their conditions may 
be said to be dynamical rather than statical; that all 
mycological forms (fungi) are dependent, for their 
primary manifestation, on conditions of moisture and 
decay ; that all plant-life, from the lowest cryptogam to 
the lordliest conifer, is dependent on some similar inci- 
dence of conditions ; that the mastodon, now only 
known by his fossil remains, must have wallow r ed forth 
from his " necessary mire" (plasmic conditions) in the 
Eocene period ; and that all animal life must have come 
from some underlying law of primordial conditions, as 
impressed upon matter, in harmony with the " Divine 
Intendment'' from the beginning; and that this law is 
still operative in the production of new forms of life 
whenever and wherever the same may appear. We 
shall also show that all living organisms, such as seeds, 
fungus-spores, morphological cells, etc., perish at a tem- 
perature of about ioo° C, and that Bacteria, Torulce, and 
other infusorial forms, making their appearance in super- 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. I 59 

heated flasks, originate not from morphological cells, 
plastide particles, bioplasts, or any other vital organism, 
but from indestructible vital units, which are everywhere 
present in the organic matter of our globe, and ready to 
burgeon forth into life whenever the necessary vital 
conditions exist, and the proper incidences of environ- 
ment occur. 

We have also shown that the earth still obeys the 
divine command to bring forth, or — if objection be 
made to this form of statement as unscientific — still 
obeys some inexorable underlying law tantamount to 
such command, and can no more help " bringing forth," 
when the necessary telluric conditions favor, than the 
cold can help coming out of the north, or the clouds 
dropping rain, when the necessary meteorological con- 
ditions occur. Give the future American botanist the 
physical geography of a country — its average rain-fall, 
temperature, etc., and the plant zone in which it lies, 
and, whether explored or unexplored, he will give us 
the general character of its vegetation, and name most 
of the plants and trees peculiar to its soil. And he 
will do this, not because he has any faith in the pres- 
ent theories of plant-migration, nor in the necessary 
distribution of seeds, but because he will study his 
favorite science with reference to latitude, elevation, 
climate, physical characteristics, rain-fall, soil-constitu- 
ents, and other influencing conditions of plant-life. 

But we will now proceed to consider the duration of 



l6o TRUE GENESIS. 

vegetable species, for the purpose of showing that the 
evolutional changes they are undergoing, if any, must 
cover infinitely vaster periods of time than we have 
any data for determining, to say nothing of the un- 
verified theories the evolutionists have been spinning 
for us. 

Our geologic and paleontologic records are becom- 
ing richer in materials, more interesting in details, 
and more authentic in character, every year. We are 
turning back page after page of these lithographic 
records, only to find the domain of science widened 
and deepened in interest as we advance, or as our 
rocks are 'being excavated, our mountains tunneled, 
our vast mines explored, and the beds of our rivers 
and arms of seas thoroughfared and traversed by the 
iron rail. Meanwhile, science exhibits signs of becom- 
ing less devoted to new-fangled theories, more exact- 
ing in her demands upon her votaries, and more eager 
to extend the domain of facts as the only true basis 
on which to rest her claims for future recognition. 
She is less dogmatic to-day than she was a year ago, 
and is likely to become less so a year hence than 
now. And this is largely due to her methods of re- 
search and inquiry. She is now everywhere sending 
out her hardier and more enthusiastic sons into new 
fields of exploration, to return laden with ampler ma- 
terials to build, and richer treasures to adorn, a tem- 
ple worthy of her name. In the field of the fossilized 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. l6l 

fauna and flora, these treasures are of the highest 
value and interest, all indicating not only wide areas 
of distribution, but immense periods of time, in which 
species have existed without any greater changes in 
character than the necessary shadings into varieties 
would seem to require. For nature everywhere char- 
acterizes her methods of production and reproduc- 
tion by a loving tendency to diversify and variously 
adorn her species, as if to express the infinite concep- 
tions of that power above her, which " spake and it 
w T as done, which commanded and it was brought forth." 

From the fossilized plants of Atanekerdluk — a 
flora rich in species and wonderfully preserved in type 
— and the Miocene flora of Spitzenburg, to the 
southernmost limits of vegetation on the globe, sci- 
ence has reached out her hands for materials, and 
gathered them with as much success as avidity. And 
all scientific botanists agree in referring these fossilized 
forms from the high northern latitudes, to the Miocene 
period — one so remote that we can form no adequate 
conception of it, except as time may be measured by 
geologic periods. And these materials show that varie- 
ties of the Sequoia, the tulip-tree, oaks, beeches, wal- 
nuts, firs, poplars, hazelnuts, etc., etc., all flourished 
in these sub-arctic regions during the far-distant period 
we have named. Many of them must have grown on 
the spot w 7 here their trunks are now to be found, as 
their roots remain undisturbed in the soil, as well as 



162 TRUE GENESIS. 

at a time when these regions enjoyed a warm or cold 
temperate climate. Many of these fossilized and car- 
bonized forms are identical with the living species of 
to-day, conclusively showing that neither natural va- 
riation, nor any secondary causes, have worked out 
any changes capable of being scientifically expressed 
in genetic value. 

There is* also abundant evidence to show that 
many of the present tropical forms flourished in cen- 
tral and southern Europe as far back as the warm 
inter-glacial epoch in the Eocene period. And if 
these inter-glacial periods occurred at the lowest min- 
umum limits of eccentricity in the earth's orbit, as 
calculated by Leverrier's formulae, we can have no 
conception whatever of the length of time actually 
intervening the period named and our present era. 
Mr. Croll has given us the limits of highest glaciation 
covering the last three million years, and shows that 
there have been but two periods of superior eccen- 
tricity in that time, and can be only one in the next 
million years, with but two or three intervening maxi- 
ma and minima that may, or may not have been, of 
any special value. It is true that he assigns impor- 
tance to these maxima, as affecting possible glacia- 
tions, but there are other eminent astronomers and 
physicists who differ from him, and really attach little 
or no importance to these or any other intervening 
periods of eccentricity. If Mr. Croll is correct in his 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 1 63 

theory and estimates, we must separate these superior 
glacial epochs by an interval of not less than one mil- 
lion seven hundred thousand years ; and nearly three 
of these periods must have intervened since some of 
the present tropical forms flourished in Europe. And 
if these forms have undergone no specific change in 
all this time, how many years will it require to work 
out even one of Mr. Darwin's many evolutional changes ? 
The kinship between some of these arctic and sub- 
arctic fossilized flora and the living forms of to-day, is 
so near that they cannot be distinguished by a single 
difference. This is true of some of the varieties of the 
Sequoia family, the oaks, beeches, firs, hazelnuts, etc., 
while others are . so nearly identical that it would be 
difficult to classify them as separate varieties. At all 
events, if they cannot be placed in the list of identical 
species, they cannot be ruled out of representative types. 
But why should our speculative botanists insist upon 
these " evolutional changes " in plant-life — these " deri- 
vative forms" of which they are constantly speaking? 
Paleontological botany has given us the very highest 
antiquity of species, and the most that can be claimed 
is that nature was just as prolific of diversified forms 
millions of years ago as now. Because we, by forcing 
nature into unnatural, if not repugnant, alliances, can 
produce 

— " Streak' d gillyflowers, 
Which some call nature's bastards/' 



164 TRUE GENESIS. 

it is no evidence that she commits any such offence 
against herself. Her alliances are all loving ones. She 
indulges in no forced methods of propagation. If she 
produced the Sequoia gigantea, or the great redwood 
tree of our California Sierra, as far back as the Crusta- 
ceous period, she has propagated it ever since according 
to her own loving methods, and it is idle to talk of the 
Sequoia Langsdorfii as being the original ancestor of this 
tree, or any other distinguished branch of the sequoias. 
How much more rational the suggestion of Professor 
Agassiz that these trees — the entire family of sequoias 
— were quite as numerous in individual varieties at first 
as now, and that the fruit of the one can never bear the 
fruit cf the other. 

Again, take the still hardier and more numerous 
branches of the Quercus or oak family. M. De Candolle 
has expended a vast deal of ingenuity to show that 
the various members of this old and ancestrally-knotty 
family have all descended from two or three of the 
hardier varieties. He arrives at this conclusion from a 
geographical survey of what he would call the " whole 
field of distribution, " and " the probable historical con- 
nection between these congeneric species/' But science 
should deal with as few probabilities as possible, espe- 
cially where experience furnishes no guide to certainty, 
and only the remotest clue to likelihood. We should 
never predicate probabilities except on some degree of 
actual evidence, or some likelihood of occurrence, falling 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 1 05 

within the limits, analogically or otherwise, of human 
observation and experience. In no other way can we 
determine whether an event is probable or not. But 
here we have not so much as a probable experience 
to guide us. Geographical distribution in the past is 
hardly a safe criterion to go by, because we can never 
be absolutely certain that we have the requisite data 
on which to form a determinate judgment. The Quer- 
cus robur may furnish the maximum test to-day, but a 
few concealed pockets of nature may bring some other 
variety of the congeneric species to the front to-mor- 
row, requiring M. De Candolle to correct his classifica- 
tion. There are no less than twenty-eight varieties of 
this one species of oak, all of them conceded to be 
spontaneous in origin, and it has been on the earth 
quite as long as the more stately tribe of Sequoias. 
Besides, not more than one twenty-thousandth part 
of the earth's surface has been dug over to determine 
the extent to which any one of its varieties has flour- 
ished in the past. 

Since these several varieties are only one degree 
removed from each other, M. De Candolle supposes di- 
vergence to be the natural law which has governed 
their growth, and not hereditary fixity. But here 
again he has only remote probabilities to work upon, 
no absolute data. We are still speaking of his fossi- 
lized herbaria, not his modern specimens. These may 
show a large number of genetically-connected individ- 



1 66 TRUE GENESIS. 

uals, or those claimed to be so connected. And yet 
no naturalist can be certain that, because they exhibit 
similarly marked characteristics, the one ever de- 
scended from the other ; for the universal experience- 
rule still holds good that " like engenders like," and 
we search in vain for anything more than a similarity 
of idea, or logical connection, which justifies a recog- 
nition of the individuorum similium in Jessieu's defini- 
tion of species. But similarity must not be mistaken 
for absolute likeness, which nowhere exists in nature. 
Infinite diversity is the law, absolute identity the 
rarest possible exception. No two oak leaves, for in- 
stance, in a million will be found actually alike, al- 
though taken from the same tree, or trees of the same 
variety ; and the same may be said of the segmenta- 
tion and branching of their limbs, as well as the stria- 
tums of their corticated covering, Et sic de similibus 
everywhere, and with respect to every thing. Nature 
is more solicitous of diversity and beauty, than of 
similarity and tameness of effect, in all her landscape 
pictures ; and the Platonic conception that " contra- 
ries spring from contraries, ,, may be only a supplemen- 
tary truth to that of de similibus. In the eye of the 
soul all objective existences are discerned in their 
logical order, or as consecutive thoughts of the Divine 
mind, as outspoken in the material universe. To in- 
sist upon cutting down these transcendental forms* 
* These transcendental or ideal forms may be said to correspond to the 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 1 67 

into the smallest possible number of similar or identi- 
cal forms, may be all well enough to accomplish sci- 
entific classification ; but the productive power of 
nature can never be limited by these mental processes 
of our own. 

The oak family can be traced back to the Mio- 
cene period, and consequently enjoys quite as high 
an antiquity as the sequoias. Professor Gray, in 
speaking of the Quercus robur and its probable origin, 
says that it is " traceable in Europe up to the com- 
mencement of the present epoch, looks eastward, and 
far into the past on far-distant shores." By " far-dis- 
tant shores, " he undoubtedly means Northwest Amer- 
ica, where its remotest descendants still flourish. But 
that these trees should have waded the Pacific, or 
sent their acorns on a voyage of discovery after new 
habitats on the Asiatic coast, is hardly more probable 
than Jason's voyage after the golden fleece, in any 
other than a highly figurative sense. The spontane- 
ous appearance of a forest of oaks on the eastern 
shores of Asia was just as probable, under favoring 
conditions — though occurring subsequently to the 
time of their appearance on this continent — as that of 

" spiritual essences " of Plato. They are the eternal, immutable principles 
which are discernible to the eye of the soul, as the sensible objects they 
represent are discernible to the eye of the body. Modern metaphysics 
may deem them mere abstractions, but a higher realistic philosophy will 
treat them as substantive forms, of which the objective reality is but the 
shadow. 



168 TRUE GENESIS. 

the miniature forests of " samphire," or small saline 
plants, which spontaneously made their appearance 
about the salt-works of Syracuse, when conditions ac- 
tually favored. The high antiquity of the oak makes 
no difference in respect to the principle of dispersion, 
since geographical conditions are what govern, and 
not the theoretical considerations of the speculative 
botanist. 

Mr. A. R. Wallace's formula concerning the origin 
of species, that they " have come into existence coin- 
cident both in time and place with preexisting closely- 
allied species/' may or may not be true so far as in- 
dividual localization is concerned. But it proves nothing 
in the way of original progeny, nor can we, by any 
actual data before us, satisfactorily determine, under 
this formula, which of the tw r o closely-allied species 
preceded the other. If they came coincidently, both 
in time and place, their existence must have been con- 
current, not separated by preexistence. The formula may 
be true to this extent, that the conditions favoring the 
appearance of one species may have equally favored 
what we call a closely-allied species. But even in this 
case, the material sequence is lost, and we have nothing 
to express a relationship as from parent to progeny. 
For, however restricted as to localization, each species 
preserves its own characteristics, the similarities always 
being less than the dissimilarities. These, and other 
equally conclusive facts of observation, led Professor 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 1 69 

Agassiz to question any necessary genetic connection 
between the different species, or between even the 
same species, in widely-separated localities ; his idea be- 
ing precisely that advanced by us in connection with 
the Bible genesis, that localization depended on geo- 
graphical conditions, not on the migration of plants or 
the dispersion of seeds. 

The actual geographical distribution of species — any 
species — does not depend solely on lines of ancestry, 
however great their persistence of specific characters ; 
nor on any principle of natural selection, nor on the 
possibility of fertile monstrosities, but on the simple 
incidence of conditions ; and M. De Candolle, in his 
" Geographie Botanique," virtually concedes this, while 
treating of geographical considerations in connection 
with distribution. He in fact says, in so many words, 
that the actual distribution of species in the past 
"seems, to have been a consequence of preceding con- 
ditions. " * And he is forced to this conclusion by his 
virtual abandonment of plant-migration, and the alleged 
means of seed-distribution. 

The question after all, says Professor Gray, is not 
" how plants and animals originated, but how they came 

* Herbert Spencer may be quoted as authority on this point. He says : 
" There is invariably, and necessarily, a conformity between the vital func- 
tions of any organism, and the conditions in which it is placed 

We find that every animal is limited to a certain range of climate ; every 
plant to certain zones of latitude and elevation. " And the same law holds 
good as to the marine fauna and flora, each specific form being confined to 
its own sea-depth, or distance north or south from the thermal equator. 



i ;o 



TRUE GENESIS. 



to exist where they are, and what they are." On only 
one of these points — that of favoring conditions — carl any 
satisfactory answer be given, except as we defer to the 
Bible genesis, which explains all. And the reason is, 
that we can never determine what forms are specific 
without tracing them back to their origin, and this is 
impossible. Orders, genera, species, etc., are only so 
many lines of thought on which we arrange our classi- 
fications, just as the parallel wires of an abacus, with 
their sliding balls, are the lines on which we make our 
mathematical computations. Agassiz would not allow 
that varieties existed in nature, except as man's 
agency effected them, that is, as they were brought 
about by artificial processes. 

These artificial processes are quite numerous, and 
many of them have been practised from remote an- 
tiquity. But they seem to have no counterpart in na- 
ture, except as insects may contribute to modifications 
by the distribution of pollen. But all modifications of 
this character tend towards infertility, while few plants 
accept any fertilizing aid from other and different spe- 
cies. Any break in their hereditary tendencies, result- 
ing in a metamorphosis that involves the integrity of 
their stamens and pistils, is stoutly resisted by nature. 
In considering the question of species, therefore, we 
should confine our observations to those produced by 
natural, not artificial, methods ; to plants as propagated 
by the loving tendencies of nature, not by the arbitrary 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. I/I 

and exacting methods of man — those looking to his 
gratification only. All these fall into the category of 
" nature's bastards/' as Shakespeare happily defines 
them. In view of these considerations, and the new 
methods of classification, such as grouping genera into 
families or orders, and these into sub-orders, tribes, sub- 
tribes, etc., we can readily understand why the great 
Harvard Professor should have wholly eliminated com- 
munity of descent from his idea of " species," or hesitated 
to regard varieties otherwise than as the result of man's 
agency. 

Indeed, the whole question of species, as well as 
varieties, is likely to undergo material modifications in 
the future. On some points the botanists and zoolo- 
gists differ widely already, many making likeness 
among individuals a secondary consideration, and gen- 
ealogical succession the absolute test of species. Oth- 
ers, on the contrary, make resemblance the funda- 
mental rule, and look upon habitual fecundity within 
hereditary limits as provisional, or answering to 
temporary needs only. These differences of opin- 
ion would seem to be the more tenaciously held as 
the question of new varieties presses for solution at 
the hands of nature, rather than by the agency of 
man. All these varieties tend less to new races than 
to cluster about type-centres, and can go no further 
than certain fixed limits of variation, beyond which 
all oscillations cease. But none of these questions 



1/2 TRUE GENESIS. 

touch the real marrow of the controversy as to origin, 
or aid us in determining the duration of species. 

The presence of the two great families of trees — 
the sequoias and the oaks — as far back as the Miocene 
period, if not extending through the Eocene into the 
Cretacious, is conclusive of the point we would make, 
that no great evolutional changes have taken place in 
the last two or three million years, and none are 
likely to take place in the next million years, except 
that the Sequoia gigantea may drop out, from the van- 
dalism of man or the next glacial drift. 

M. Ch. Martins, in his " Voyage Botanique en Nor- 
wege," says " that each species of the vegetable king- 
dom is a kind of thermometer which has its own 
zero. ,, It may also be said to have its hygrometric 
and telluric gauges, or instruments to determine the 
necessary conditions of moisture and soil-constituents. 
When the temperature is below zero, the physiologi- 
cal functions of the plant are suspended, either in tem- 
porary hybernation or death. And so when the hy- 
grometric gauge falls below the point of actual susten- 
tation, the plant shrinks and dies; while, without the 
necessary conditions, it would never have made its ap- 
pearance. There was nothing more imperative in the 
command for the earth to bring forth than the neces- 
sary conditions on which plant-life depended in the 
first instance, and still depends, as we have endeavored 
to show. 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 173 

Dr. J. G. Cooper, in an interesting article prepared 
by him at the expense of the Smithsonian Institute, 
on the distribution of the forests and trees of North 
America, with notes and observations on the physical 
geography, climate, etc., of the country, after classify- 
ing, arranging, and tabulating the results of the vari- 
ous observations forwarded to that institution, in- 
dulges in the following general observations: "We 
have with a tropical summer a tropical variety of 
trees, but chiefly of northern forms. Again, with our 
arctic winters, we have a group of trees, which, though 
of tropical forms, are so adapted to the climate as to 
lose their leaves, like the northern forms, in winter. 
But, here, it must be distinctly understood, is no al- 
teration produced by climate. Trees are made for and 
not by climate, and they keep their characteristics 
throughout their whole range, which with some ex- 
tends through a great variety of climate.' , The italics 
are the authors, and we suppose he means by "tropi- 
cal" and "arctic," the sub-tropical and sub-arctic. 

In making his general observations, he had before 
him large collections of the leaves, fruits, bark, and 
wood of trees from all parts of the United States, in- 
cluding portions of Mexico, the Canadas and Alaska, 
and extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific. But 
one of the most important elements — in fact, the most 
important — is wanting in the tables before us, and that 
is, the elevation at which these thousands of specimens 



174 



TRUE GENESIS. 



were obtained. So great an oversight as this should 
not have occurred, although it may not have been en- 
tirely Dr. Cooper's fault. He had his materials to 
work upon, and may have done the best that any one 
could with them. And yet it is just as important to 
know at what elevation a particular tree grows in its 
own plant zone, as to know whether it comes from a 
sub-arctic or sub-tropical region. 

But this was not the comment we designed to make. 
Dr. Cooper labors, with most professional botanists, 
under the delusion that all our plants and trees origi- 
nated in some one " centre of creation, " at some period 
or other in time and place, and have been steadily 
spreading themselves outward from that centre until 
they occupy their present areas of distribution. We 
have no objection to his clinging to this superannuated 
faith and belief, if he derives any pleasure in flushing 
up these " traditional grasshoppers." But we have a 
right to insist that he shall be logical. He wants it 
distinctly understood that trees are made for, and not 
by, climate. Then his " centre of creation " should be 
everywhere, not a localized one. For he insists that no 
alteration can be produced by climate, but that the 
characteristics of each specific form are preserved 
throughout its entire range of distribution. But if 
these nomadic and migratory forms have wandered 
thus far from their centres of creation, it would seem 
that the trees had either adapted themselves to the cli- 



DISTRIBUTION AND PERMANENCE OF SPECIES. 1 75 

mate, or the climate to the trees. But our Smithsonian 
systematizer will allow us neither horn of this dilemma. 
He insists that the trees were made for the climate, 
and that they have preserved their characteristic fea- 
tures during their entire ambulation upon the earth's 
surface. 

With the change of a single monosyllabic predicate, 
this proposition is undoubtedly true. We have never 
heard that plants or trees were " made." They were 
ordered "to grow," or rather the earth was commanded 
to bring them forth, which is an equivalent induction* 
And the fact that they grow now, renders it absolutely 
certain that they grew at first, when u out of the ground 
made the Lord God to grow " every plant of the field, and 
every tree that is pleasant to the sight. We accept this 
genesis for the want of a better. And if Dr. Cooper 
will add to his climatic conditions, the hygrometric 
and other conditions necessary for the development 
and growth of his plants and trees, we will agree with 
him to the fullest extent of his novel position — that 
trees neither adapt themselves to the climate, nor the 
climate to the trees ; although it is true that trees 
modify climate quite as much as they are modified by it. 
The true physiological formula is undoubtedly this : — 
Trees make their appearance in climatic and other 
environing conditions, and flourish, without material 
change in characteristics, so long as these conditions 
favor. Why they make their appearance is not a de- 



I ; 6 TRUE GENESIS. 

batable question, except as we assume a preexisting 
vital principle, and apply to its elucidation our subtlest 
dialectical methods. We are told that God commanded 
the earth to bring them forth, after his spirit (the ani- 
mating soul of life) had moved upon the face of the 
depths — the chaotic and formless mass of the earth in 
the beginning. Plato has uttered no profounder or more 
comprehensive truth than this, with all his conceptions 
of Deity and the perfect archetypal w r orld after which 
he conceived our own to be modeled. Our preference 
for the Bible genesis over the Platonic conception is, 
that it is vastly simpler and constitutes a more objective 
reality to the human soul. Besides, we find it true in 
fact, since the earth is constantly teeming with life, as 
if in obedience to some great primal law impressed upon 
matter by an infinitely superior intelligence to our 
own. — 

" If this faith fail, 
The pillar' d firmament is rottenness, 
And earth's base built on stubble." 



CHAPTER VII. 

WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 

THE question, " What is life?" does not lie with- 
in the province of human reason, the science of 
logic, or the intuitions of consciousness, to determine. 
It furnishes no objective datum on which to predicate 
attributes that are either congruent or diverse. It 
can only be defined as the coordination of the vis vita 
in nature, which is an undisguised form of reasoning 
in a circle. We can ascribe to it only such attributes 
as are utterly inconceivable in any other concept or 
object of thought. It admits of but one attribution, and 
that embracing an identical proposition. To say of 
life that it is " a coordination of action," might be 
true as a partial judgment, but not as a comprehen- 
sive one ; otherwise, crystallization would fall under 
its category, which is manifestly an illicit induction. 
It allows, therefore, of no possible explication, analy- 
sis, or separate logical predicament. It stands abso- 
lutely alone and apart by itself — a positive, self-sub- 
sistent vital principle, or process of action, which all 
physiologists agree, for the sake of convenience and 
uniformity of expression, in designating as a power, 
property, force, etc., in nature. Whenever questioned 



178 TRUE GENESIS, 

as to its origin the subtlest and profoundest intellects, 
in all ages of the world, have returned but one an- 
swer: "I know no possible origin but God'' — the 
great primal source of all life in the universe. 

Among the ancients we find an almost equivalent 
induction in the phrases, borrowed by them from the 
highest antiquity, " Jupiter est genitor" " Jupiter est 
quodcunque vivit" etc., which, although uninspired ut- 
terances, strike their roots deeply into the terra in- 
cognita of consciousness, wherein we ascribe to God 
the " issues of life" as a paramount theological con- 
ception. When the ingenious and learned French- 
man defined life as " the sum of all the functions by 
which death is resisted, " he was as conclusively in- 
dulging in the argumentum in circulo as if he had said, 
" Life is the antithesis of what is not life." This 
would be as luminous a definition as that which should 
make Theism the opposite of Anti-theism, or the Alge- 
braic statement x—y the antithesis of x+y — one of no 
definitional value so long as there is no known quantity 
expressed in the formula. 

To begin with begging the question, and then 
adroitly whipping the argument about a pivotal point, 
as a boy would whip a top, may be amusing enough 
to the childish mind, but is manifestly making no 
more progress in logic than to substitute an ingenious 
paraphrase of a term for its real definition. It is a 
mere verbal feat at best, without the possibility of 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 179 

reaching any determinate judgment. It is like some 
of the half-circular phrases we are likely to meet with 
in the categories of modern materialistic science, such 
as the " correlated correlates of motion, " the " poten- 
tiated potentialities of sky-mist," the " undifferentia- 
ted differentialities of life-stuff, ,, called, by special con- 
descension on the part of the materialists, " life." All 
of which is an easy logic, but a whimsical enough way 
of putting it. 

According to Leibnitz, everything that exists is 
replete with life, full of vital activity, if not an actual 
mass of living individualities. But this daring hypoth- 
esis has ceased to attract the attention it once re- 
ceived. There are states and conditions of matter in 
respect to which it is idle to predicate the vis vitce* 
For the great bulk of our globe is made up of the 
highly crystallized and non-fossiliferous rocks, which 
neither contain any elementary principle of life, nor 
exhibit the slightest trace of vital organism, even to 
the minutest living speck or plastid. During all 
those vast periods of uncomputed time, covering the 
world's primeval history, there was an utter absence 
of life until the chief upheavals of the outer strata 
of our globe, now constituting the principal moun- 
tain chains of its well-defined continents, occurred. In 
whatever atomic or molecular theories, therefore, we 
may indulge, in respect to the original formation of 
the earth, the utmost stretch of empirical science can 



180 TRUE GENESIS. 

go no further, in the solution of vital problems, than 
to touch the threshold of inorganic matter, where, in 
our backward survey of nature, vegetable life begins 
and animal life ends. All beyond this point must be 
given up to other " correlates of motion " than those 
to which the materialists specifically assign the begin- 
nings of life. 

The theory of " panspermism," originating with 
the Abbe Spallanzani in modern times, and still 
stoutly advocated by M. Pasteur and some few others, 
is manifestly defective in this, — that it goes beyond 
the inorganic limit in assigning vital units to all matter, 
even to its elemental principles. It is true that they 
speak of " pre-existing germs" — " primordial forms 
of life" — that are " many million times smaller than 
the smallest visible insect." But their assumptions go 
far beyond the construction we give to the Bible gene- 
sis, which merely asserts that the germinal principle 
of life— that of every living thing — is in the earth, or 
in " the waters and the earth," which were alone com- 
manded " to bring forth." 

Some of the panspermists have gone so far as to 
assert that everything which exists is referable to the 
vis vita — to non-corporeal, yet extended vital units, 
mere metaphysical points — like Professor Beale's bio- 
plasts in the finer nerve-reticulations — or living things 
endowed with a greater or less degree of perceptive 
power. This was the assumption of the great German 



WHA T IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. l8l 

philosopher, Leibnitz, who carried the panspermic 
theory so far as to accept the more fanciful one of 
" monads " — those invisible, ideal, and purely specula- 
tive units of Plato, which go to make up the entire uni- 
verse, extending even to the ultimate elements, or ele- 
ments of elements. Leibnitz says: " As it is with the 
human soul, which sympathizes with all the varying 
states of nature — which mirrors the universe — so it is 
with the monads universally. Each — and they are in- 
finitely numerous — is also a mirror, a centre of the uni- 
verse, a microcosm : everything that is, or happens, is 
reflected in each, but by its own spontaneous power, 
through which it holds ideally in itself, as in a germ, the 
totality of things/' 

But the specific germ theory advanced in the Bible 
genesis, is capable of being taken out of the purely 
speculative region in which " panspermism " landed the 
great German philosopher. It is a simple averment that 
the animating principle of life is in the earth; that the 
germs of all living things, vegetal and animal alike, are 
implanted therein, and that they make their appear- 
ance, in obedience to the divine command, whenever 
and wherever the necessary environing conditions occur. 
The fact that nature still obeys this command is proof 
that she has the power to do so — that this indestructible 
vital principle still animates her breast. Innumerable 
experiments, as well as phenomenal facts, attest the 
truth of this genesis of life, while the researches of Pro- 



lS2 TRUE GENESIS. 

fessor Bastian and other eminent materialists, made m in- 
fusorial and cryptogamic directions, confirm rather than 
discredit it. The fact that it appears for the first time 
in this ancient Hebrew text can detract nothing from 
its value as a scientific statement. Granting that pans- 
permism may rest upon a purely fanciful and unsub- 
stantial basis, it is but fair to concede that its great ad- 
vocates have honestly attempted to explain by it all 
the vital phenomena occurring in nature, as M. Pasteur 
is conclusively attempting to do now. It is certain 
that the materialists, who are resolutely antagonizing 
the panspermic, as well as all other " vital " theories, 
have not yet gone so deeply into elementary substance 
as to shut off all further investigation in these directions.* 
Neither the lowest primordial cell, nor the least con- 
ceivable molecule, has yet been reached by the aid of the 
microscope, any more than the outermost circle of the 
heavens has been penetrated by the aid of the telescope. 
We must stop somewhere, and when we find a scientifi- 
cally formulated statement which embraces all vital 
phenomena, and satisfactorily accounts for them all, 
whether it originally came from Aristotle, from Plato, 
or from Moses, is a matter of comparatively slight mo- 
ment, so far as the scientific world is concerned. At 

* Speaking of the ultimate principles or elements of matter, Plato is 
quoted by Humboldt as exclaiming with modest diffidence, " God alone, 
and those whom he loves among men, know what they are.'' It is only 
those who seek to eliminate God from the universe that speak with confi- 
dent flippancy on the subject of molecular machinery and force-correlations. 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 183 

least, it would seem so to us. But to talk of the de novo 
origin of " living matter " as the result of the dynamic 
force of molecules — themselves concessively " dead mat- 
ter " — is to indulge in quite as fanciful a speculation as 
the advocates of the panspermic hypothesis have ever 
ventured to suggest. Professor Bastian is forced to go 
back of his infusorial forms and fungus-germs to a micro- 
scopical " pellicle/' from which he admits they are 
" evolved." But why evolved ? Does not the principle 
of vitality lie back of the pellicle, as w T ell as the fungus- 
germ ? How absolutely certain is he that the extrem- 
est verge of microscopic investigation has been attained, 
in what he is pleased to designate " primary organic 
forms?" " Evolution " is a very potential word, and no 
one may yet know what boundless stores of absurd 
theory and metaphysical nonsense are locked up in it ! * 
He admits that " evolution," as embracing the idea of 
" natural selection," can have nothing to do with the vast 
assemblage of infusorial and cryptogamic organisms, un- 
til they assume definitely recurring forms, that is, rise 
into species and breed true to nature. Then, he agrees 
with Mr. Darwin, that the law of vital polarity or " he- 
redity," as he calls it, may come in and play its part 

* As long as the evolutionists cannot agree among themselves as to 
what constitutes the process of evolution, it can hardly be expected that the 
public will accept their speculations as conclusive inductions. Professor 
Bastian, who strongly commits himself to the doctrine, thinks the word 
" evolution " arbitrary and open to many objections, while Mr. Herbert 
Spencer says ; — M The antithetical word Involution would much more truly 
express the nature of the process." 



1 84 TRUE GENESIS. 

towards effecting evolution, or variability, in both animal 
and vegetal organisms, but not before. Why then 
should he lug in, or attempt to lug in, the diverse poten- 
tialities of this word " evolution," for the purpose of 
demonstrating the dynamic law governing the develop- 
mental stages of his microscopic pellicle? This, he will 
agree, lies far below the point, in primary organism, 
where specific identity, or the law of heredity, asserts its 
full recognition. All below this developmental point is 
inconstancy of specific forms, with no line of ancestry 
to be traced anywhere. 

This, Professor Bastian readily concedes, notwith- 
standing it cuts the Darwinian plexus squarely in the mid- 
dle. He says: " Both Gruithuisen and Treviranus agree 
that the infusoria met with have never presented similar 
characters when they have been encountered in different 
infusions ; nor have they been uniform in the same infu- 
sion, when different portions of it have been exposed to 
the incidence of different conditions. The slightest varia- 
tions in the quality or quantity of the materials em- 
ployed, are invariably accompanied by the appearance 
of different organisms — these being oftentimes strange 
and peculiar, and unaccompanied by any of the familiar 
forms." Other writers of equal eminence in this field of 
investigation have not only observed the same charac- 
teristics, but encountered the same difficulties in classifi- 
cation, from the very great diversity obtaining even in 
the nearest allied forms. So great is this diversity, and 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 185 

so multitudinous the different forms, that little certainty or 
value can be attached to the classifications already made. 
Even Professor O. F. Miiller, after he had convinced 
himself that he had discovered not less than twelve dif- 
ferent species belonging to a single genus, was subjected 
to the mortification of seeing Ehrenberg cut them all 
down to mere modifications of one and the same species. 
We refer to these several statements of fact for the 
purpose of emphasizing the true genesis of life as supple- 
mented by " the incidence of different conditions," on 
which all vital manifestations depend. The presence of 
the germinal principles of life in the earth is emphati- 
cally averred in the Bible genesis. And we have only 
to connect the doctrine of " conditional incidence " 
with this averment, to account for all the vital phe- 
nomena which so profoundly puzzle these gentlemen 
while prying into the mysteries of the ephemeromor- 
phic world. Whatever may be the character of any in- 
fusion, or to whatever incidence of conditions it may be 
subjected, it will produce some form of life ; not because 
it contains this or that morphological cell, destructible 
at a temperature of ioo° C — that to which it is experi- 
mentally subjected before microscopic examination, — 
but because every organic infusion, whether undergoing 
the required heat-test or not, contains vital units — those 
as indestructible by heat as by glacial drift — which bur- 
geon forth into life whenever the proper conditions of 
environment obtain. The slightest variation, in either 



1 86 TRUE GENESIS. 

the quantity or quality of the material employed in the 
infusion, is, as these eminent microscopists agree, inva- 
riably accompanied by the appearance of different forms 
of life, just as the slightest change in soil-conditions, 
such as that produced by the presence of one species 
of tree with another in natural truffle-grounds, will 
result in the appearance of another and altogether 
different plant, as well as truffle tuber. 

But the theory which the vitalists are more particu- 
larly called upon to combat is that to which the non- 
vitalists most rigidly adhere ; and we refer to it, in this 
connection, that the reader may compare its complexity 
and involution of statement and idea with the extreme 
simplicity of the biblical genesis, as heretofore presented. 
We give it in the exact phraseology employed by Profes- 
sor Bastian : " Living matter is formed by, or is the result 
of, certain combinations and rearrangements that take 
place in invisible colloidal molecules — a process which is 
essentially similar to the mode by which higher organ- 
isms are derived from lower in the pellicle of an organic 
infusion. " This carefully-worded definition of life, or 
the origin of " living matter," presents a hypothetical 
mode of reasoning which is eminently characteristic of 
all materialists. In the stricter definitional sense of the 
word, there is no such thing as " living matter" or 
" dead matter," as we have before claimed. There are 
" living organisms " in multitudinous abundance — those 
resulting from, not in % the vis vitce, or the elementary 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 1S7 

principle of life in nature — as there are also " dead or- 
ganisms " in abundance. This materialistic definition of 
life, which is not so much as a generic one even, begins 
in an absurdity and ends in one. It is agreed that 
the " proligerous pellicle " of M. Pouchet, the " plastide 
particle " of Professor Bastian, the " monas " of O. F. 
Muller, the " bioplast " of Professor Beale, etc., are es- 
sentially one and the same thing, except in name. 
They are mere moving specks, or nearly spherical par- 
ticles, which exhibit the first active movements in or- 
ganic solutions. They vary in size from the one hun- 
dred-thousandth to the one twenty-thousandth of a 
second of an inch in diameter, and appear at first hardly 
more than moving specks of semi-translucent mucus. 
Indeed, Burdach calls them " primordial mucous layers." 
But they move, pulsate, swarm into colonies, and act 
as if they were guided, not by separate intelligence, but 
by some master-builder supervising the whole work of 
organic structure. This master-builder is the one " ele- 
mentary unit of life," which directs the movements of 
all the plastide particles, constantly adding to their 
working force, from the first primordial mucous layer of 
the superstructure to the majestic dome of thought (in 
the case of man) which crowns the temple of God on 
earth.* 

But this " pellicle " of Professor Bastian is not mere 

* " Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of 
God dwelleth in you? n 1 Cor. 3. xvi. 



1 83 TRUE GEXESIS. 

structureless matter, any more than the " bioplast " of 
Professor Beale, The fact that they move, pulsate, 
work in all directions, shows that they have the neces- 
sary organs with which to work. These organs may 
be invisible in the field of the microscope, but that is 
no proof that they do not exist. Organs are as essen- 
tial for locomotion in a plastide particle as in a masto- 
don or megatherium, and if the microscope could only 
give back the proper response, we should see them, if 
not be filled with wonder at the marvellous perfection 
of their structure. But into whatever divisions or 
classifications we may distinguish or generalize the 
properties of matter, we can never predicate vitality of 
it, any more than we can predicate intellectuality. In- 
deed, " intellectual matter" presents no greater incon- 
gruity or invalidity of conception than " vital matter." 
These qualifying terms are applied to the known laws 
and forces of nature, not to insensate matter. To 
assert that life results from " certain combinations 
and rearrangements of matter," and not in them, is 
utterly to confound cause and effect, or so incongru- 
ously mingle them together that no logical distinction 
between the two can exist as an object of perception. 
Without the vis vitce, or some germinal principle of 
life, lying back of these " combinations and rearrange- 
ments of matter," and determining the movements of 
their constituent molecules, there could be no vital 
manifestation, any more than there could be a corre- 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES 



189 



late of a force without the actual existence of the force 
itself* 

The materialists give the name of " protoplasm " to 
that primitive structureless mass of homogeneous mat- 
ter in which the lowest living organisms make their ap- 
pearance. They claim that this generic substance is 
endowed with the property or power of producing life 
de novo, or, as Professor Bastian puts it, of " unfolding 
new-born specks of living matter " which subsequently 
undergo certain evolutional changes ; but whether they 
die in their experimental flasks, or rise into higher and 
more potentially endowed forms of life, it is difficult 
for those following their diagnoses to determine. They 
further claim that the same law of vital manifestation 
obtains in organic solutions as in the structureless 
mass they call " protoplasm. " Both are essentially 
endowed with the same potentiality of originating life 
independently of vital units, or de novo, as they more 
persistently phrase it. But why speak of unfolding 
" new-born specks of living matter?" " To unfold" 
means to open the folds of something — to turn them 

* Dr. Drysdale, in his work on trie " Protoplasmic Theory of Life," 
says : " Matter cannot change its state of motion or rest without the in- 
fluence of some force from without. True spontaneity of movement is, 

therefore, just as impossible to it as to what we call dead matter 

So we are compelled to admit the existence of an exciting cause in the 
form of some force from without to give the initial impulse in all vital 
actions." In all life-manifestations, this " force from without," must be a 
pre-existing vital principle operating to effect the otherwise impossible 
change in matter. 



I90 TRUE GENESIS. 

back, get at the processes of their infoldment. It im- 
plies a pre-existing something, inwrapped as a germ in 
its environment. If not a germ, what is this pre-exist- 
ing vital something which their language implies? Is 
our scientific technology so destitute of definitional ac- 
curacy that they cannot use half a dozen scientific 
terms without committing half that number of down- 
right scientific blunders ? " New-born specks of living 
matter" is language that a vitalist might possibly use 
by sheer inadvertence ; but no avowed materialist, like 
Professor Bastian, should trip in this definitional way. 

" Living matter/' born of what? Certainly not of 
dead matter. Death quickens nothing into life, not 
even the autonomous moulds of the grave. It implies 
the absence of all vitality — a state or condition of mat- 
ter in which all vital functions have been suspended, 
have utterly ceased, if, indeed, they ever existed. It 
behooves the materialists to use language with more 
precision and accuracy than this. " Dead matter/' 
whatever the phrase may imply, can bear nothing, pro- 
duce nothing, quicken nothing. The pangs of death 
once past, the pangs of life cease. Nor is there any 
birth from unquickened matter. Animals bear young, 
trees bear fruit, but force produces results. What then 
quickens protoplasmic matter ? Neither vital force, 
nor vegetative force, if we are to credit the materialists. 
They would scorn to postulate such a theory, or ac- 
cept any such absurd remnant of the old vitalistic 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. igi 

school. It is rather " molecular force " — a physical, 
not a vital unit — that gives us these " new-born specks 
of living matter."* This is what they would all assert 
at once, in their enthusiasm to enlighten us on a new 
terminology. 

But " molecular force" fails to give us any addi- 
tional enlightenment on the subject we are investigat- 
ing. It is even less satisfactory than " atomic force," 
or " elementary force" — that which maybe considered 
as inhering in the elementary particles from which both 
atoms and molecules are derived, And since both the 
ultimate atom and the ultimate molecule lie beyond 
microscopic reach, the assumption that vital pheno- 
mena are the result of either molecular force or atomic 
force, rests upon no other basis than that of imaginary 
hypothesis. To postulate any such theory of life, is 
going beyond the limits of experimental research and 
inquiry, and hence adopting an unscientific method. 
At what point the smallest living organism is launched 
into existence — started on its life-journey — no one is 
confident enough to assert. The materialist is just as 
dumb on this subject as the vitalist ; and the only ad- 
vantage he can have over his antagonist is to stand on 
this extreme verge of attenuated matter, and deny the 
existence of any force beyond it. The postulation by 
him of molecular force at this point, is virtually an 

* A favorite set-phrase of Professor Bastian in speaking of morphologi- 
cal cells or " units," as he sometimes calls them. 



192 



TRUE GENESIS. 



abandonment of the whole controversy. He ceases to 
be a materialist the moment he passes the visible 
boundaries of matter, in search of anything like " un- 
differentiated sky-mist " beyond it. 

All that we definitely know is that certain condi- 
tions of protoplasmic matter, of organic solutions, of 
soil-constituents, etc., produce certain forms of life ; 
and, in the case of solutions, certain low forms of life. 
But whether the lower rise, by any insensible grada- 
tions, into the higher, more complex, and definitely 
expressed forms of life, is altogether unknown. That 
any such gradations can be traced from the lowest 
vital unit, in the alleged collocations of molecules, is 
not yet claimed. These primordial collocations, like 
the lowest living organisms, lie beyond the microscopic 
aids to vision, so that the ultimate genesis of life re- 
mains as much a mystery as ever — becomes, in fact, a 
mere speculative hypothesis. And when it comes to 
this sort of speculation, the materialist is just as much 
in the dark as the vitalist, and neither can have any 
advantage over the other, except as the one may adopt 
the analytic, and the other the synthetic method. 

This is the materialistic argument covering the de 
novo origin of living organisms : — There is no greater 
microscopical evidence, they assert, that these organ- 
isms come from pre-existing invisible germs or vital 
units, than that crystals are produced in a similar man- 
ner — that is, come from pre-existing invisible germs 



WHA T IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 



193 



of crystals. But this is overlooking all generic distinc- 
tion in respect to processes or modes of action. Crys- 
tals are inorganic matter which form, do not grow. 
They are mere symmetrical arrangements, not organic 
growths; and are produced by some law akin to chemi- 
cal affinity, acting on the molecules of their constituent 
mass. They possess no vital function. They show no 
beginning or cessation of life. But, once locked up in 
their geometric solids, they remain permanently en- 
during forms— concessively inorganic, not functionally- 
endowed, matter. To speak, therefore, of the " germs 
of crystals," is using language that has no appreciable 
significance to us. Germs are embryonic, and imply 
a law of growth — a process of assimilation, not of mere 
aggregation. 

But, at the risk of being tedious, let us extend this 
argument of the materialists a little further : The only 
difference, they will still insist, between the preexisting 
germs of crystals and plants — or the only difference es- 
sentially worth noticing — is that crystalline particles of 
matter are endowed with much less potentiality of un- 
dergoing diversified forms and structural changes than 
the more highly favored vital particles, such as the pro- 
ligerous pellicle, the bioplast, the plastide, etc. The 
one represents mere crystallizable matter, the other the 
more complex colloidal or albuminoid substance, or that 
capable of producing a much greater number of aggre- 
gates. The analogies, they concede, end here. But the 



1 94 TRUE GENESIS. 

difference is world-wide when we come to processes — 
the true experimental test in all classification. Crystal- 
lizable substances crystallize — that is all. They pass 
into a fixed and immovable state, and mostly into one 
as enduring as adamant; while colloidal or albuminoid 
matter (laboratory protoplasm) takes on no fixed forms 
— only those that are ephemeral, merely transitory. This 
is so marked a feature, in respect to all the primordial 
forms of life, that Professor Bastian gives them the more 
distinctive name of " ephemeromorphs," in place of in- 
fusoria. But all these primordial forms grow — develop 
into vital activity. Not so with a solitary crystal. 
Everywhere the statical unit forms, the dynamical unit 
grows ; the one aggregates, the other assimilates; the 
one solidifies, the other opens up into living tissue ; the 
one rests in the embrace of eternal silence, the other 
breaks the adamantine doors, and makes nature reson- 
ant with praise. 

Great stress is laid by the materialists on the change- 
ability of certain microscopic forms, and the startling 
metamorphoses they apparently undergo in different 
infusions, especially those forms having developmental 
tendencies towards fungi and certain low forms of algae. 
They attribute their different modes of branching, ar- 
ticulation, segmentation of filaments, etc., both to in- 
trinsic tendencies and extrinsic causes, the latter de- 
pending, no doubt, in a great measure upon the chemi- 
cal changes constantly taking place in their respective 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 



195 



infusions. These intrinsic tendencies, they would have 
us believe, depend upon the dynamic force of mole- 
cules, rather than any vital unit, or even change in 
elementary conditions. But " Dynamism " simply im- 
plies that force inheres in, or appertains to, all material 
substance, without specifically designating either the 
quantity or quality of the inhering force. If these 
materialists, therefore, use the terms " dynamic force," 
in this connection, in the sense in which we use vital 
force, or in the sense in which they use " statical force" 
as applied to the formation of crystals, in contradis- 
tinction from " dynamical force " as applied to living 
organisms, we have no special objection to urge against 
this particular formula. It presents no such formidable 
antagonism as the vitalists would expect to encounter 
from them. 

M. Dutrochet is approvingly quoted by Professor 
Bastian, as asserting that he could produce different 
genera of mouldiness (low mycological forms) at will, by 
simply employing different infusions. This is unques- 
tionably true, with certain limitations. And the chief 
limitation is as to his (M. Dutrochet's) will. He might 
" will," for instance, to plant one field with corn and 
another with potatoes, but if the husbandman he em- 
ployed to do the planting should happen to plant the 
one crop where he had willed to plant the other, and 
corn should grow where potatoes were planted, and vice 
versa, then he might be said to have produced corn at 



I96 TRUE GENESIS. 

ivilL And so of his infusions. No change in their con- 
ditions enabled him to produce one species, much less 
a genus, of mouldiness in preference to another, by any 
change in the infusions employed by him. The power 
which implants life in the mycological world, implants it 
in every other world, from that without beginning to that 
without end. And this implanted life is quite as com- 
plete in one form as another, — 

"As full, as perfect, in vile man that mourns, 
As the rapt seraph that adores and burns." 

All that the materialists can claim respecting man's 
agency in the production of life is, that he may take ad- 
vantage of the uniform laws of nature, so far as they are 
known to him, planting seeds here, changing chemical 
conditions there, using different infusions in his experi- 
mental flasks, — organic or inorganic, as he may choose — 
and then await the action of these uniform laws. He 
will find them operative everywhere, and if he studies 
them deeply enough, he will find that they are not so 
much the laws of nature as they are the laws of nature's 
God. 

Professor Bastian thinks he has conclusive evidence 
that what he calls " new-born specks of living matter " 
are produced de novo, that is, independently of any con- 
ceivable germ or germinal principle of life implanted in 
nature. But he confounds this implanted principle of 
life with the living organism it produces. His morpho- 
logical cells, as well as plastide particles, are among 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 



197 



these living organisms, as is conclusively shown by his 
own experiments. These all perish in his super-heated 
flasks. But the vital principle that produced them — 
that which becomes germinal under the proper condi- 
tional incidences — he can no more destroy by experi- 
mentation than he can create a new world or annihilate 
the old one. His flask experiments, therefore, prove 
nothing ; and all this talk about de novo production is 
the sheerest scientific delusion. For, were it possible to 
destroy every plant, tree, shrub, blade of grass, weed, 
seed, underground root, nut, and tuber to-day, the earth 
would teem with just as diversified a vegetation as ever 
to-morrow. A few trees, like the gigantic conifers of the 
Pacific slope, might not make their appearance again, 
and some plants might drop out of the local flora ; but 
the Pater omnipotens Aither of Virgil, would descend 
into the bosom of his joyous spouse (the earth), and, 
great himself, mingle with her great body, in all the 
prodigality, profusion, and wealth of vegetation as before.* 

* That great and justly celebrated naturalist, Buffon, in speaking of 
the universal origination of the lower forms of animal life by a process 
termed, in his time, " spontaneous generation/' says : " There are, perhaps, 
as many living things, both animal and vegetable, which are produced by 
the fortuitous aggregations of ' molecules organiques,' as there are others 
which reproduce themselves by a constant succession of generations." It 
is said that Buffon was for some time associated with the Abbe Needham in 
his experiments in vital directions, and was much influenced by them. So 
that it is by no means certain that he did not accept the Abbe's " force 
vegetative " in place of his more materialistic views respecting "molecules 
organiques. " At all events, his statement that as many living things ap- 
pear in nature independently of reproducing causes as by successive gen- 
eration, is no doubt true. 



I98 TRUE GENESIS. 

But these defiant challengers of the vitalists, who re- 
fuse us even the right to assume the existence of a 
special " vital force " in nature, are anything but con- 
sistent in their logical deductions. For while they re- 
solutely deny the invasion of vital germs in their experi- 
mental flasks, they talk as flippantly of the " germs of 
crystals," and their presence in saline and other solu- 
tions, as if there were no scientific formula more satis- 
factorily generalized than that establishing their exist- 
ence. Even Professor Bastian speaks of " germs/' in a 
general sense, as if they thronged the earth, air, water, 
and even the stratified rocks, in countless and unlimited 
numbers. But we fail to see that any of his accurately 
obtained results determine their exclusion from the ex- 
perimental media employed by him for that purpose. 
His unit of value is a morphological cell, a derivative 
organism rather than a primary vital unit ; and all or- 
ganisms are, as we have before said, destructible by heat. 
Professor Agassiz is pretty good authority for doubting 
the existence of such a cell. The difficulty of assigning 
to it any definitional value is, that it lies too near the 
ultimate implications of matter — those shadowy and in- 
explicable confines not yet reached — to admit of any 
scientific explication necessarily resting on objective 
data. If they mean by " germs " primary organic cells, 
then none exist in their super-heated infusions, and 
they are logical enough in rejecting the idea of their 
invasion. But in assuming the cell to be the ultimate 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 



I 99 



unit of value, is where they trip in attribution, and 
stumble upon a partial judgment only. 

The only value attaching to their theory of crystal- 
line germs is, that it conclusively establishes the law of 
uniformity by which all structural forms are determined, 
whether they originate in organic infusions or inorganic 
solutions — in protoplasm or protoprism. The crystal- 
line system presents no variability in types, but a rigid 
adherence to specific forms of definitely determined 
value. Whatever geometrical figure any particular 
crystal assumed at first, it has continued to assume 
ever since, and will forever assume hereafter. As a 
primary conception of the " Divine Intendment " (to 
speak after the manner of Leibnitz) it can neither 
change itself, nor become subject to any law of change, 
or variability, from eternally fixed types. And this is as 
demonstrably true of all living types, after reaching the 
point of heredity, as of the countless crystalline forms 
that go to make up the principal bulk of our planet. In 
this light, and as affording this conclusive induction, the 
crystalline argument of the materialists has its value. 

The materialists should not too mincingly chop logic 
over the validity of their own reasoning. If they force 
upon us their conclusions respecting statical aggregates, 
or crystalline forms, let them accept the inductions 
that inevitably follow in the case of dynamical aggre- 
gates, or living organisms. Beggars of conditions should 
not be choosers of conditions, nor should they be al- 



200 TRUE GENESIS. 

lowed to dodge equivalent judgments where the validity 
of one proposition manifestly rests upon that of another. 
If they insist upon the presence of a chemical unit, or, 
worse still, a crystalline "germ" or unit, in the case 
of statical aggregations, they are effectually estopped 
from denying the presence of vital units in dynamical 
aggregations. And if they further force upon us the 
conviction that the process of aggregation, when once 
determined, remains in the one case, eternally fixed and 
certain, they should not be permitted to turn round 
and insist that, in the other case, there is nothing fixed 
and certain, but all is variability, change, uncertainty 
of specific forms. If vital units have only a hypotheti- 
cal existence, then chemical units, statical units, and 
morphological units, should fall into the same catego- 
ries of judgment. 

A great deal of needless ingenuity has been wasted, 
both by the vitalists and materialists, in formulating im- 
possible definitions of life — in attempts to tell us what 
life is. But Mr. Herbert Spencer is believed, by his 
many admirers, to have hit upon the precise explana- 
tory phrases necessary to convey its true definitional 
meaning. He defines it as " the continuous adjustment 
of internal relations to external relations." This defi- 
nition, when first formulated, was received by all the 
materialists of Europe with the wildest enthusiasm. 
It was absolutely perfect. All the phenomenal facts 
of life fitted into it, as one box, in a nest of them, fitted 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 2 OI 

into another. The universal world was challenged to 
show that any other phenomenal fact than the one of life 
would fit into this prodigious formula of Mr. Spencer. 
The London " Times " tried its hand on it, but only 
in a playful way. It said : " All the world, or at least 
all living things, are nothing but large boxes contain- 
ing an infinite number of little boxes, one within the 
other, and the least and tiniest box of all contains the 
germ," — the elementary principle of life. But this 
was hardly a legitimate characterization. A nest of 
boxes presents no idea of " continuous adjustment," 
nor are the internal relations of one box adjusted to the 
external relations of another. The definition is really 
that of a piece of working machinery — any working ma- 
chinery — and was designed to cover Mr. Spencer's theory 
of " molecular machinery " as run by molecular force. 

But the earth presents the most perfect adjustment 
of internal relations to those that are external, and it 
continuously presents them. Even the upheaval of its 
fire-spitting mountains affords the highest demonstra- 
tion of the adjustment of its inner terrestrial forces to 
those that are purely external ; and much more does 
it show the adjustment of its internal to its external 
relations. There is a continuous adaptation of means 
to ends, of causes to effects, of adjustments to re-ad- 
justments, in respect to the characteristics of the earth's 
surface — its physical configuration, the distribution of 
its fluids and solids, its fauna and flora, its hygrome- 



202 TRUE GENESIS. 

trie and thermometric conditions, its ocean, wind, and 
electro-magnetic currents, and even its meteorological 
manifestations — all showing a continuous adjustment 
of interior to exterior conditions or relations. The 
earth should, therefore, fall under the category of 
"life," according to Herbert Spencer's definitional for- 
mula. And so should an automatic dancing-jack that 
is made to run by internal adjustments to external 
movements or manifestations. There are any number 
of Professor Bastian's " ephemoromorphs " that do not 
live half as long as one of these automatic dancing- 
jacks will run, and so long as they run, the adjustment 
of their internal to their external relations is continuous. 
The success of Mr. Spencer's definition of "life" 
encouraged Professor Bastian to try his hand at it, 
with this definitional result : " Life," he says, " is an 
unstable collocation of Matter (with a big M), capable 
of growing by selection and interstitial appropriation 
of new matter (what new matter ?) which then assumes 
similar qualities, of continually varying in composition 
in response to variations of its Medium (another big M), 
and which is capable of self-multiplication by the sep- 
aration of portions of its own substance." 

It shall not be our fault if the reader fails to under- 
stand this definition — to untwist this formidable for- 
mula of life. And we can best aid him by grammati- 
cally analyzing its structure. And, 

I. " Life is capable of growing." We are glad to 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 203 

know this. As a vitalist it enables us to take a step 
towards the front — gets us off the " back seat" to 
which we were summarily ordered at the outset of this 
inquiry. We let its " unstable collocation " pass for 
what it is worth, and stick to our grammatical analysis. 

2. " Life grows — is capable of doing something." 
This assurance positively encourages us. 

3. u It grows by selection and interstitial appropria- 
tion." This is still more encouraging. It emboldens 
us to take a second step forward. Life, we feel, is in- 
creasing in potentiality. 

4. " By appropriation it enables new matter to as- 
sume similar qualities to old matter!' This makes us 
more confident than ever; we take another step for- 
ward — are half disposed to take two of them. Life is 
getting to be almost a u potentiated potentiality," to 
adopt the style of materialistic phrases. 

5. "It causes matter to continually vary in composi- 
tion!' Bravo ! we unhesitatingly take two steps for- 
ward on the strength of this most comforting assu- 
rance. Life is assuredly getting the upperhand of 
Matter (with a big M.) It is no longer a mere " undis- 
covered correlate of motion " — a hypothetical slave to 
matter only. It wrestles with it — throws it into the 
shade. We involuntarily take several more steps for- 
ward. 

6. "Life is capable of self-multiplication" — has 
almost a creative faculty. Here we interject a perfect 



204 TRUE GENESIS. 

bravura of " bravoes, ,, and, stepping boldly up to the 
front, demand of Professor Bastian to " throw up the 
sponge," take a back seat, and there — formulate us a 
new definition of " life." 

But our London University materialist is not en- 
tirely satisfied with his own definition, or at least with 
the moral effect of it. He thinks that all these at- 
tempts to define life as a non-entity only, tend to keep 
up the demoralizing idea that it is an actual entity. 
We entirely agree with him in this conclusion. The 
infelicity and entire inconclusiveness of the definition 
he has vouchsafed us can hardly have any other 
effect. He sees this himself, and hence this foot-note 
to his great w r ork on Ephemeromorphs: " Inasmuch 
as no life can exist without an organism, of which it is 
the phenomenal manifestation, so it seems compara- 
tively useless to attempt to define this phenomenal 
manifestation alone — and, what is worse, such attempts 
tend to keep up the idea that life is an independent 
entity." 

It may be objected that our grammatical analysis 
of the professor's definition of life is unfair, since he 
manifestly intended that it should cover a " living 
thing," and not "life" as an abstract term. Our reply 
to this is, that he makes no distinction between the 
two. Life, with him, is simply a phenomenal manifes- 
tation. The two are correlative terms ; so that his defi- 
nition of the one must necessarily be the definition of 



WHA T IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 205 

the other, either as an identical or partial judgment. 
But let us take his definition entirely out of its abstract 
sense, and run it into the concrete. The able pathologi- 
cal anatomist of the London University college is a 
" living thing." He is, therefore, presumably a pheno- 
menal manifestation. He is capable of growing, by 
" selection and interstitial appropriation, " in reputa- 
tion at least, if not in the direction of " an independent 
entity." His work of twelve hundred pages, covering 
his laborious delvings into the ephemeromorphic world, 
is conclusive on this point. As a phenomenal mani- 
festation alone, any attempt to define either him or 
his professional labors, may be worse than useless, 
since it would tend to keep up the idea that he is an 
actual London entity. We are very confident that he 
is not a London nonentity, but are willing to agree 
that he is either the one or the other. The flaw that 
we are after lies in his interstitial logic, not in the hallu- 
cination in which he indulges respecting nonentities. 
His assumption that life cannot exist without an or- 
ganism, of which it is the phenomenal manifestation, 
is what we propose to deal with. 

Now, directly the reverse of this proposition is 
what is true. An organism cannot exist without life 
or an independent vital principle in nature, any more 
than celestial bodies can be held in their place inde- 
pendently of gravitation. The vital principle that or- 
ganizes must precede the thing organized or the living 



206 TRUE GENESIS. 

organism, as the great formative principle of the uni- 
verse (call it the will of God, gravitation or what you 
may) must have existed before the first world-aggre- 
gation. In logic, we must either advance or fall back 
— insist upon precedence being given to cause over 
effect, or deny their relative connection altogether. 
The organism is the phenomenal manifestation, not 
the vital principle which organizes it. To say that 
there can be no manifestation of life without an or- 
ganism is true ; but to assume that the vital principle 
which organizes is dependent on its own organism for 
its manifestation is absurd. It would be the lesser fal- 
lacy to deny the phenomenal fact altogether, and in- 
sist that cause and effect are mere intellectual aberra- 
tions, or such absurd mental processes as find no cor- 
relative expression in nature, as that embodying the 
idea of either an antecedent or a consequent. 

u Plato lived. " He ate, he drank, he talked divinely. 
He was the occupant of an admirably constructed life- 
mansion ; one that St. Paul would have looked upon 
as " the temple of God/' and all the world would have 
recognized as a god-like temple. His head was a study 
for the Greek chisel ; none was ever more perfectly 
modeled, or artistically executed. All agreed in this. 
And yet it was not the habitat but the habitant that 
attracted the admiration of the Greek mind ; enkindled 
its highest enthusiasm ; drew all the schools of phil- 
osophy about him. at once. It was the lordly occu- 



WHAT IS LIFE? ITS VARIOUS THEORIES. 207 

pant of the temple, the indwelling Arclicus, presiding 
over all the organic phenomena and directing all the 
dynamic powers therein, which was so profoundly pre- 
sent in the living Plato. Even Professor Haeckel, of 
the famous University of Jena, would not deny this, 
with all that his new terms "ontogeny" and " phylo- 
geny " may imply. When potential life passed over 
into actual life in the individual Plato, it was not the 
pabulum that assimilated the man, but the man the 
pabulum. If this were not so, then the mere poten- 
tiality of growing, as in the case of plants and animals, 
would be all there is to distinguish the phenomenal 
manifestation of a Plato from that of a mole or a 
cabbage-stalk. In other words, if the animating prin- 
ciple of life — or, as the Bible has it, the " animating 
soul of life " — is not what manifests itself in material 
embodiment, but the reverse, what can Professor Haeckel 
mean by his new term " phytogeny," which ought to 
cover the lines of descent in all organic beings? 

If it be a question of mere pabulum, it is altogether 
mal pose. Pabulum is nothing without a preexisting 
" something" to dispose of it. It is not so much as a 
jelly-mass breakfast for one of Professor Haeckel's " pro- 
tamoebae ; for if it were served up in advance, there 
would be none of his little non-nucleated jelly-eaters to 
partake of it, much less any of his " protogenes," As 
the famous Mrs. Glass would say, in her " hand-book of 
cookery," if you want a delightful " curry," first catch 



208 TRUE GENESIS. 

your hare. But our ingenious professor of Jena dis- 
penses with both the hare and the curry, in serving up 
his pabulum to the " protamoebae." The improvident 
pabulum " evolves " its own eaters, and then, spider-like, 
is eviscerated by them, as was Actaeon by his own 
hounds. As Life, therefore, begins in the tragedy of 
Mount Cithaeron, it is to be hoped it will end in the 
delights of Artemis and her bathing nymphs. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 

THE methods by which the advocates of a purely 
physical origin of life seek to establish the correct- 
ness of their conclusions, are unfortunately not always 
attended by uniform results in experimentation. They 
subject their solutions of organic matter to a very high 
temperature by means of super-heated flasks, the tubes 
to which are so packed in red-hot materials that what- 
ever air may enter them shall encounter a much greater 
degree of heat than that indicated by boiling water. 
At this temperature (ioo° C — 21 2° F) they assume that 
all living organisms perish, especially when the solutions 
containing them have been kept, for the space of fifteen 
or twenty minutes, at this standard point of heat. But, 
in the light of all the experiments w r hich have been 
made in this direction, there is some doubt as to the 
entire correctness of their assumption. That many, if 
not most living organisms, perish at a temperature of 
100° C, there is little or no doubt; but that there are 
some which are much more tenacious of life, that is, 
possess greater vital resistance to heat, is equally 
unquestionable. 

M. Pasteur, for instance, mentions the spores of 



210 TRUE GENESIS. 

certain fungi which are capable of germinating after an 
exposure of some minutes to a temperature of 120° to 
125 C. (248-2 5 7° F), while the same spores entirely 
lose their germinating power after an exposure for half 
an hour or more to a slightly higher temperature, Dr. 
Grace-Calvert, in a paper on " The Action of Heat on 
Protoplasmic Life," recently published in the proceed- 
ings of the Royal Society, asserts that certain " black 
vibrios'" are capable of resisting the action of fluids at a 
temperature as high as 300° F, although exposed therein 
for half an hour or more. But none of these crucial tests, 
however diverse in experimental results, really touch the 
all-rmportant question in controversy. They all relate 
either to living organisms, or to the seeds and spores of 
vegetation, not to living indestructible " germs" — invis- 
ible vital units — declared to be in the earth itself. 

We use the term " vital unit" in the same restricted 
sense in which the materialists speak of " chemical 
units/' " morphological units," etc., which they admit 
are invisible in the microscopic field, and hence they 
can have no positive information as to their destructi- 
bility or indestructibility by heat. That this vital unit 
lies, in its true functional tendencies, between the chemi- 
cal and morphological units— manifesting itself in the 
conditions of the one and resulting in the structural 
development of the other — is no new or startling theory, 
but one that has been more or less obscurely hinted at by 
Leibnitz, and even acknowledged as possible by Herbert 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 211 

Spencer. It is this vital unit that assimilates or aggre- 
gates protoplasmic matter into the morphological cell, 
or the initial organism in a vital structure, or an ap- 
proach towards structural form. Morphological cells 
are not therefore u units," considered as the least of 
any given whole, nor are they mere structureless matter, 
or any more homogeneous in character than in sub- 
stance. Different chemical solutions give rise to differ- 
ent morphological cells, as differently constituted soils 
produce different vegetal growths. Change the chemi- 
cal conditions in any solution or infusion, and you 
change the entire morphological character of the in- 
fusoria appearing therein.* The cells are living organ- 
isms springing from vital units, and can no more mani- 
fest themselves independently of these units than life can 
manifest itself independently of an actual organism. 
And they make their appearance in the proper environ- 
ing conditions, just as the oak comes from its primordial 
germ or vital unit in the chemically changed conditions 
of the soil. Everywhere the vital germ or unit precedes 
the vital growth as the plant or tree precedes the 
natural seeds it bears. 

This is not only the logical order, but the exact 
scientific method of vital manifestation and growth. 

* M. Treviranus, who followed Spallanzani and M. Bonnet in these 
flask experimentations, first noticed the important fact that the animalculae 
appearing in different organic infusions, depended on the nature and quality 
of the infusions themselves, and that the changed conditions of the same 
infusion produced new and independent forms of life. 



212 TRUE GENESIS. 

In this truth lies the whole mystery of vegetal and 
animal life as hitherto manifested on our globe, with 
the single exception of man whose crowning distinc- 
tion it was to receive " a living soul/' This may be 
rejected as a scientific statement, but its verification 
wall appear in the very act of its rejection. Pry as 
deeply as we may into the arcana of nature in search 
of exact scientific truth, and we shall ultimately land 
in one or the other of these propositions, — either that 
nature was originally endowed with some occult and 
unknown power " to bring forth," which power is either 
continuously inherent or continuously imparted, or else 
" specific creation " was the predetermined plan and pur- 
pose, with no higher or more specialized animal or vegetal 
forms than were specifically created in the beginning. 
Otherwise, we are inevitably forced back, by our mental 
processes, which w r e cannot resist, upon an effect without 
a cause — a physical law of the universe without any con- 
ceivable law-giver — an all-pervading, all-energizing prin- 
ciple of matter which must have existed as a cause in- 
finitely anterior to its first effect. And this is forcing 
language into such crazy and paralytic conclusions as 
to utterly destroy its efficiency as a vehicle of thought. 
To conceive of the existence of the universe, or of 
any possible law that may be operative therein, with- 
out an adequate antecedent cause, is as metaphysically 
impossible as to conceive of substance without form, 
space without extension, or a God who has been su- 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 213 

perceded in the universe by the operation of his own 
laws. For if the world-ordaining and world-arranging 
intelligence of the universe has ceased to ordain and 
arrange, — if all things therein have been left to the 
operation of fixed and eternally unchangeable laws — 
then no further supervisional direction is required on 
the part of either an infinite or a finite intelligence, and 
our idea of a God must disappear in the paramount in- 
duction of a universe which has successfully risen up 
in insurrection against its own maker and lawgiver, 
if it has not remorselessly consigned him to some in- 
conceivable limbo outside of the universe itself. But 
this Titanic, and worse than satanic, insurrection on 
the part of a universe of matter and motion, is only 
the conjectural coinage of the human brain — the wild 
supposition hazarded by the materialistic mind — and 
fortunately has no conceivable counterpart outside of it. 

But the palpable blunder, in materialistic science, 
consists in its overlooking the necessary outgrowth of 
theological ideas in the human mind — as conclusively 
a phenomenal fact of nature as the invariable uni- 
formity of astronomical movements, the ebb and flow 
of the tides, or the electro-magnetic waves of the earth 
itself. And nature furnishes no greater clue to the 
one set of phenomena than the other. For when we 
say that bodies act one upon another by the force of 
gravity, we are no nearer an explication of the force 
itself, than we should be were we to allege any corres- 



214 TRUE GENESIS, 

ponding manifestation on the part of the human mind. 
Kant says ; " We cannot conceive of the existence of 
matter without the forces of attraction and repulsion — 
the conflict of two elementary forces in the universe ;" 
much less can we have any conception of the elemen- 
tary forces themselves. Science can, therefore, assign 
no more conclusive reason for overlooking psychical 
manifestations than physical phenomena. Nor is the 
one set of phenomena any more marvellous in its 
manifestations than the other. They may both fur- 
nish food for speculative thought and inquiry, and yet 
the nearer we get to the ultimate implications of 
either, the more completely are we lost in Professor 
Tyndall's " primordial haze," from which he assumes 
that the universe, and all the phenomenal manifesta- 
tions therein, originally came. 

But however rapidly these materialistic theories 
may disappear in the scientific waste-basket of the 
future, there is one sublime verity that will stand the 
test of all time, and that is, that the moral universe of 
God is no less complete, in the Divine Intendment, 
than the physical universe, while the latter is so inter- 
correlated and inter-tissued with the former, in all its 
conceivable relations, that it can no more exist inde- 
pendently of its correlative, than matter can exist inde- 
pendently of space, or time independently of eternity.* 

* Leibnitz, as quoted by M. Bonnet, says : — 

H Que T Entendement Divin etoit la religion eternelle des Essences ; parce 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 215 

According to this view of Leibnitz, all living organ- 
isms have their own essence, or essential qualities and 
characteristics. They have been from all eternity in 
the " Divine Intendment," and can undergo no 
changes or modifications which shall make them es- 
sentially different from what they were in the begin- 
ing, or are now. This is not only true of the u germs " 
that are " in themselves upon the earth," but of every 
living thing, whether lying within or beyond the tele- 
scopic or microscopic limits. As a law of causation, 
as well as of consecutive thought, there must be in the 
order of life (all life) a continuous chain of ideas link- 
ing the past to the present, the present to the future, 
and the future to eternity. But that this continuous 
chain is dependent on mere physical changes or mani- 
festations, is a logical induction utterly incapable of 
being exhibited in scientific formulae. The higher and 
more satisfactory induction is that which places cause 
before effect, the Maker before the made, the Creator 
before the creature, and so on, in the analogical order, 
till the smallest conceivable " vital unit " is reached in 

que tout ce qui existe existoit comme de toute eternite comme possible ou 
en idee dans 1' entendement de Dieu. J' exprimerai cette verite sublime en 
d' autres termes : le plan entier d' univers existoit de toute Eternite dans 
1' entendement du Supreme Architects Tou tes les parties de V univers et 
jusqu' au moindre atome etoient deffines dans ce plan. Tous les change - 
mens qui devoient survenir aux difterentes pieces de ce Tout immense y 
avoient aussi leurs representations. Chaque etre y e'toit figure parses char- 
acters propres : et 1' acte par lequel la Souveraine Puissance a realise ce 
plan, est ce que nous nommons la Creation.''' 



2l6 TRUE GENESIS. 

the universe of organic matter. To begin, therefore, 
with microscopic observation, at a point in the ephem- 
eromorphic world where that optical instrument fails 
to give back any intelligible answer, and synthetically 
follow this chain of causation upward and outward to 
Dr. Tyndall's " fiery cloud of mist," in which it is as- 
sumed that all the diversified possibilities and poten- 
tialities of the universe once lay latent, may answer the 
logical necessities of the " Evolution " theory, but will 
never satisfy the inductive processes of a Plato, a Leib- 
nitz, or a Newton. 

Professor Tyndall, in speaking of his " fiery-cloud " 
theory, says: " Many who hold the hypothesis of nat- 
ural evolution would probably assent to the position 
(his position) that at the present moment all our phil- 
osophy, all our poetry, all our science, all our art, — 
Plato, Shakespeare, Newton, and a Da Vinci — are po- 
tential in the fires of the sun." But, to be consistent 
in their inductions, they should proclaim themselves 
sun-worshippers at once, and ascribe to that trans- 
cendent luminary all the potentialities of a universe 

" Fresh-teeming from the hand of God/' 

But what possible advantage, we would ask, can this 
physical hypothesis of life have over that which as- 
cribes to God the issues of all life in the universe, from 
the highest to the lowest living organism? We can 
positively conceive of none but that of placing the 
cosmological cart before the horse, and so harnessing 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 2 \J 

" cause and effect " in tandem, that the latter shall 
uniformly precede the former in the chain of logical 
induction. As a dialectical feat, in exhibiting the 
higher possibilities of logic, it may have its advan- 
tages in subordinating the facts of science to the higher 
illuminations of fancy, and thus resting the basis of 
reality on the ever-changing and ever-shifting assump- 
tions of the human mind. For the materialistic theo- 
ries of to-day are not those of yesterday, nor is there any 
certainty that they will be those of to-morrow. They 
are almost as fantastic and variable as the forms of the 
kaleidoscope, although, as a general rule, they lack the 
symmetrical arrangements and proportions of that sci- 
entific toy. 

Professor Bastian, in considering the heterogenetic 
phenomena of " living matter," is obliged to fall back, 
near the end of his great work, on " the countless my- 
riads of living units which have been evolved (?) in the 
different ages of the world's history." But by what 
process a " vital unit " can be evolved^ he does not con- 
descend to tell us. He has no " primordial formless 
fog" to fall back upon as has Professor Tyndall, nor 
can he imagine anything beyond the least of possible 
conceptions in a chemical, morphological, or vital unit. 
A " unit " can neither be evolved nor involved ; it 
admits of no square, no multiple, no differentiation ; it 
is simply the ever-potent unit of " organic polarity," by 
which it multiplies effects, but can never be multiplied 



218 TRUE GENESIS. 

itself. The chief fault that we have to find with the 
London University professor is that he confounds a 
morphological cell with a morphological unit, and insists 
upon drawing unwarrantable conclusions therefrom. His 
" countless mvriads of living units " are all well enough 
in their way. That they exist in the earth, and are 
constantly developed into innumerable multitudes of liv- 
ing organisms, of almost inconceivable variety, in both 
the animal and vegetal world, is true, as he half-re- 
luctantly admits in almost the identical language we 
here use. 

And he also admits that morphological cells, when 
once formed, continue to grow by their own individual 
power or inherent tendency. But before they can mani- 
fest any such inherent tendency, they must be devel- 
oped from the vital units that lie back of them, and on 
which their manifestation unquestionably depends. The 
only doubt that can possibly exist on this point is, that 
the process of development cannot be determined by 
microscopic examination. But we may as well assume 
the presence of vital units in the case of dynamical ag- 
gregates, as for Professor Bastian to insist upon crys- 
talline units in the case of statical aggregates or crys- 
tals. Both processes, in their initial stages of develop- 
ment, lie beyond the reach of human scrutiny, and all 
that we know, or possibly can know, is, that certain in- 
organic conditions are favorable for the development of 
crystals, as certain organic conditions are favorable for 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 219 

the development of morphological cells. Beyond this 
Professor Bastian knows nothing — we know nothing. 

Professor Beale, in his recent work on " the Mys- 
tery of Life " — one that is now justly attracting very 
wide attention — says : " Between the two sets of phen- 
omena, physical and vital, not the faintest analogy can 
be shown to exist. The idea of a particle of muscu- 
lar or nerve tissue being formed by a process akin to 
crystallization, appears ridiculous to any one who has 
studied the two classes of phenomena, or is acquainted 
with the structure of these tissues." And he quietly, 
yet effectively, ridicules the idea that the ultimate 
molecules of matter — substantially the same matter, in 
fact — have the power to arrange themselves, inde- 
pendently of vital tendency, alternately into a dog-cell 
or a man-cell, according to the specific direction they 
may take, or the incidence of conditions they may un- 
dergo, in their primary movement. And for the bene- 
fit of Professor Beale, behind whose " bioplasts," we 
place the " vital unit " — not a variable but a constant 
unit — we would have him bear in mind (what he 
so well knows) that the finest fibres that go to make 
up these tissues lie quite beyond the microscopic 
limit in their interlaced and spirally-coiled reticula- 
tions, so that nothing can be predicated of their ulti- 
mate contexture, any more than of the ultimate 
distribution of matter itself. He has himself traced 
these wonderfully minute nerve-ramifications under 



220 TRUE GENESIS. 

glasses of the highest magnifying power, and knows 
that their ultimate distribution cannot be reached. 
Let him come out then, as the ablest vitalist now liv- 
ing, and boldly assert the presence of the man-tmit and 
the dog-unit, instead of falling back on his bioplastic 
spinners and weavers of tissue, which are only the ser- 
vants and willing workers of the one integral unit, or 
life-directing force, within. It is far more rational, 
and, at the same time, more accordant with strict sci- 
entific methods, to attribute these muscular and nerve 
reticulations to a single direct cause, than to a multi- 
tude of secondary causes. 

There is a w f orld-wide difference between the dog- 
ego and the \r\a.n-ego ; but the physical differences are- 
not by any means the greatest. The bioplastic spin- 
ners and weavers work as obediently for the one mas- 
ter-ego as the other. They never stop to inquire how 
far they shall differentiate this vital tissue or that, or 
in what direction even they shall work. Not a thread 
is spun nor a shuttle thrown that is not directed by 
the one head-webster of vital tissue. These obedient 
bioplasts determine nothing, direct nothing. Each 
works in his own cell as obediently as a galley-slave. 
All specific modifications, all determinate movements, 
all molecular arrangements, all multiplications of bio- 
plastic force, are the work of the one vital webster, or 
principle of life, within — that which shapes all, directs 
all, determines all. And this is true from the first or 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 221 

embryological inception of the dog-unit or "germ/' 
until the real occupant of the dog-tenement dismisses 
his bioplastic weavers, and lies down to die. And so 
of all vital units. Each determines its own structural 
form, and unchangeably retains it to the end, even to 
the slightest impression of a scar inflicted years and 
years before. The occupant of this dog-mansion has 
dismissed one set of bioplastic weavers after another ; 
has thrown aside this spun tissue and that warp and 
woof of woven texture, time and time again, so that 
the dog of to-day is not the same physical dog of 
a year ago ; and yet he has the same affection for his 
master, carries with him the same scar received twenty 
years before in the chase, gives the same glad bark of 
welcome as his owner nears home, exhibits the same 
characteristic wag in his tail, and, lying down to sleep, 
dreams of the once happy chase in which he is no 
longer able to engage. This continuous presence of 
the same dog, through all these twenty years of physi- 
cal change — the old dog reappearing in the new, a 
dozen times over — is what we mean by the constantly 
differentiating yet undifferentiated " dog-unit." 

Those who attempt to bisect this vital unit, divide 
it up into one fractional part after another, until it 
shall represent a million bioplastic workers in as many 
different cells, are committing the same sort of folly — 
in principle at least, if not in practice — as that which 
led the simple-minded daughters of Pelias to cut up 



222 TRUE GENESIS. 

their father, in the expectation of boiling the old bio- 
plasts into new, and then, by the cunning aid of Medea, 
who directed the operation, reuniting them into the one 
Peliastic-unit they so much delighted to honor. But 
this first and only recorded attempt at differentiating 
a vital unit disastrously failed, as the reader of ancient 
myths well knows, although the experiment was con- 
ducted by the most careful and loving hands. The 
necessary chemical re-agents to reproduce life, as well 
as the necessary processes of producing it de novo, 
have not yet been ascertained, nor is it likely they 
ever will be. And herein lies the most marked dis- 
tinction between crystallizable matter and living sub- 
stance. 

And yet there is no evidence that the vital principle 
perishes in the destruction of its temporary organism. It 
is not the material seed that germinates, but the vital 
principle it contains, bursting forth from its environment 
into newness of life. All that can be alleged of either 
boiled or calcined seeds is, that the material sub- 
stances of which they were composed are so changed 
in their chemical constituents, or molecular adjustment, 
that they are no longer capable of developing, or being 
developed, into a living organism. " Principles never 
die," and this is as true of the vital principles in nature, 
as those obtaining in ethics and morals. Were it pos- 
sible to restore the exact chemical conditions and con- 
stituent particles of the boiled or calcined seed, there is 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 223 

no more doubt that nature would respond to the envi- 
roning conditions, and give forth the proper expression 
of plant-life, than there is that crystals of spar would 
make their appearance in an overcharged bath chemi- 
cally prepared for that purpose. It is not the albumin- 
ous substance enclosed in the seed, but the vital prin- 
ciple therein — that continuously imparted to nature 
from the great vital fountain of the universe — which 
burgeons forth into life whenever and wherever the re- 
quired conditions obtain. 

In proof of this statement, we might instance any num- 
ber of cases where recently abandoned brick-yards and 
other clayey excavations, were situated at considerable 
distances from any natural water-courses, or fish-stocked 
ponds, from which spawn could have been derived, and 
yet these excavations have no sooner been filled with 
permanently standing rain water, than certain small 
fishes of the Cyprinidce and other families, have made 
their appearance therein.* Nobody has thought of 
stocking these standing pools of water with the fish 
in question, nor has there been any surface overflow to 

* Here is a fact given us by Dr. F. Hall, of Wallingford, Conn. : In a 
peat meadow in that town, owned by him, which was at no time subject to 
overflow, a large quantity of peat had been removed at different intervals ot 
time, when the excavations naturally filled with water. In these excavations 
there appeared not only the Cyprinidce in considerable numbers, but fresh 
water clams which grew to be as large as those in the most favored streams. 
They made their appearance the very first season after the peat was re- 
moved, and have flourished there ever since. In no other portions of the 
meadow were there any fish or clams ever noticed before, nor was there any 
other source of water-supply than the rain-falls in that locality. 



224 



TRUE GENESIS. 



account for their presence, nor any other apparent 
means of transportation, if we except the fish-catching 
birds, and they generally swallow their food in the water 
or on the nearest tree to the point of capture. Any 
theory accounting for the presence of spawn is, therefore, 
out of the question. This spawn must have traversed 
hard clay deposits for the distance of half a mile or more 
to make their appearance in these waters. The only 
possible explanation of this class of phenomena, and 
they are by no means infrequent, is to be found in " fa- 
voring conditions " and the " presence of vital units.'* 
They are primordial manifestations of life, and such as 
would have made their appearance in any corresponding 
latitude of the southern hemisphere, under the same 
favoring conditions. 

And this is true of all living organisms from the 
lowest morphological cell, in the ichthyologic world, to 
the highest and lordliest conifer that grows. Their 
spawn and seeds are perishable by heat, but the vital 
principle that organizes them is as imperishable in one 
element as another. No seven-times heated furnace, 
much less the experimental flasks of the physicist, will 
affect a vital principle of nature any more than a May- 
morning puff of the east wind would shake Olympus. 
And all the countless myriads of vital units in nature are 
now manifesting themselves in animal and vegetal forms, 
under favoring conditions, the same as in those far-distant 
epochs of the world's history when a more exuberant 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 225 

vegetation prevailed, if not a more abounding animal 
life. The same persistent, ever-acting law of vital de- 
velopment and growth has been present, in all condi- 
tions and circumstances of matter, ever since the detri- 
tus of the silicious rocks felt the first influence of the 
rains, the dews, and the sun-light. Then the earth com- 
menced " to bring forth the grass, the herb yielding seed, 
and the fruit-trees yielding fruit, after his kind ; " and in 
their growth was laid the foundation of animal life. 
Whether there was any audible or inaudible command 
of God uttered at the time, is not the question. It is 
the fact of vital growth that we are after, and not the 
command. The geologic records attest the fact, as well 
as the ever-acting vital law; and it is enough for us to 
know, with sturdy old Richard Hooker, that all law — 
and especially all vital law — "has her seat in the bosom 
of God, and her voice is the harmony of the world." 

Professor Beale, while resolutely combating the phys- 
ical hypothesis of life, is not a little unfortunate in his 
use of scientific terms. He is constantly using those of 
"living matter " and "dead matter," as if they contained 
no fatal concession to the materialists, with which to 
completely overthrow his own ultimate conclusions as 
to life. For he gains nothing by merely substituting 
" bioplasm " and " bioplasts " for " protoplasm " and 
" plastide particles." The essential plasma in both cases 
is the same, and behind each lies the vital unit or prin- 
ciple therein manifested — the invisible, indestructible 



226 TRUE GENESIS. 

germ or ZRA of the Bible genesis. Living organ- 
isms come, of course, from this essential plasma, but 
without an elementary principle or vital unit therein, 
there would be no " bioplasts/' in the sense in which 
Professor Beale uses this term. These bioplasts are 
living organisms which take up nutrient matter and con- 
vert it by assimilation into tissues, nerves, fibres, bones, 
etc. — into the higher and more complex organs that go 
to make up living structure. This mysterious transmu- 
tation of one thing into another, as organic matter into 
living organisms, is due to a vitally implanted principle, 
not to these little bioplasts, or mere epithelial and other 
tools with which the vital principle works. To apply 
the term " living matter*' to the tools with which a liv- 
ing structure is built up, is to lose sight of the master- 
mechanic using them for an apparently intelligent pur- 
pose. The microscope may demonstrate that these 
little bioplasts throb — have life ; but there is no intel- 
ligent purpose manifested by them except as they are 
moved by an unseen hand that conclusively directs the 
whole structural work — builds up the one complete 
symmetrical structure, not its thousand independent 
parts having no relation to a general plan. The future 
lord and occupant of the mansion is presumably pre- 
sent, and if he uses tools that " throb and have life," 
it is because everything he touches is quickened into 
life that it may be the more obedient to his will. If 
this structure be the soul-endowed one of man, the vital 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 



227 



principle imparted is that which fashions the epithelial 
tools, and uses them, as well in laying the embryological 
foundation, as in crowning its work with that many- 
colored " dome of thought flashing the white radiance of 
eternity/' 

Mr. Joseph Cook, who enthusiastically follows Pro- 
fessor Beale in his theory of life, in one of his " Boston 
Monday Lectures/' says ; " It is beyond contradiction 
that we know that these little points ( 4 bioplasts ') of 
structureless matter spin the threads, and weave the 
warp and woof, of organisms. " With all due respect to 
this distinguished lecturer, we must except to not less 
than three points in as many lines of his over-confident 
statement. In the first place, we know nothing respect- 
ing the " beginnings of life," which may not be contra- 
dicted with some show of reason. Take his own defin- 
ition of " bioplasts/' as copied from Professor Beale, 
coupled with what they both term " nutrient matter " 
and " germinal matter," or bioplasm, and this confident 
assertion of his will land him at once where the highest 
powers of the microscope fail to give back any intelligi- 
ble answer, or where neither assertion nor contradiction 
avails anything. A bioplast, they tell us, is a germinal 
point in germinal matter or bioplasm. It is also as- 
sumed that the central portion of every cell in an or- 
ganic tissue is a bioplast. Here this wonderful little 
weaver of tissue sits spinning his threads and weaving 
them into the warp and woof of " formed matter" — 



228 TRUE GENESIS. 

that which, according to Professor Beale, becomes " dead 
matter " as soon as it is woven ! But it is admitted that 
the nerve fibres constitute an uninterrupted network 
which admits of no endings — that is, whose ultimate 
reticulations lie beyond the microscopic limit. But there 
is a cell in every hundredth part of an inch of these ul- 
timate reticulations, in each of which one of these bio- 
plastic weavers sits plying his threads into the warp and 
woof of nerve tissue, if not of nerve force. What is 
known of these little weavers, either by Mr. Joseph Cook 
or Professor Lionel S. Beale ? Manifestly nothing, un- 
less they have been specially favored with microscopes 
of over 2,800 diameters — the highest yet made, — and 
have fathomed the ultimate implications of nerve force ; 
an assumption on the part of the Boston lecturer to 
which we are bound to except. 

Nor are these " bioplasts " mere structureless matter, 
however minute they may be as " little points." They 
differ only from " morphological cells," in the defini- 
tional language employed by different theorists, and 
lack the all-essential accuracy of distinction necessary 
to scientific classification. To define a bioplast as a 
germinal point in germinal matter, or bioplasm, is to 
draw no satisfactory line of distinction between the 
two, except that the one is a mere aggregation of the 
other. A germinal mass is only made up of germinal 
points— those considered as the least of any given 
whole — however infinitesimal they may be in theoreti- 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 



229 



cal statement. If any germinal point in germinal mat- 
ter, therefore, be a bioplast, then every germinal point, 
to the extent of making up its entire mass, must be a 
bioplast ; and the distinction between the two becomes 
merely verbal, and without generic signification. But 
every morphological cell is conceded to be an organ- 
ism, whether it lie within or beyond the microscopic 
limit. And it invariably exhibits a greater or less 
amount of cellular activity at its centre. It grows 
rather than spins; it builds up tissue, rather than 
weaves it into warp and woof; it assimilates nutritive 
matter rather than plies a loom in any conceivable 
sense in which we may view that industrial machine. 
No matter what we may call this point of vital activity 
in a cell — whether it be a bioplast, a plastid, a phys- 
iological unit, or a granule of " elementary life-stuff" — 
it simply performs the one single function of life to 
which it is specifically assigned in the process of " build- 
ing up " any one identical individual of a species, 
whether it be a man, an ape, a tree, or a parasitic 
fungus. The very admission that the bioplast spins, 
makes it an organism, and not mere structureless mat- 
ter. For the first thread it spins is manifestly for its 
own covering or the ornamentation of its own cell- 
walls. And to speak of these as " structureless mat- 
ter " is to confound all scientific sense, as well as mean- 
ing. 

The third objection to Mr. Cook's statement is, that, 



230 TRUE GENESIS, 

if bioplasts spin, it is as dependent, and not as inde- 
pendent machines or agencies. There are millions of 
these bioplasts — taking the word in the sense in which 
Professor Beale uses it — in every living organism con- 
sidered as a biological whole. In the case of man, 
there are millions of them within a comparatively small 
compass ; and each has its own cell to which its speci- 
fic work is assigned. Now, these germinal points, or 
bioplasts, in each of these myriads of cells, work, not 
separately and independently, like so many oysters in 
their respective shells, but harmoniously and together, 
as if under the supervisional direction of one supreme 
architect and builder. This builder is that one elemen- 
tary principle of life, appertaining to each specific in- 
dividual as a species, with which nature was endowed 
from the beginning, and which, in the case of man, was 
a direct emanation from Deity. It is this vital princi- 
ple manifesting itself in all living organisms, not from 
them ; directing Professor Beale's " bioplastic weavers," 
not directed by them ; availing itself of necessary plas- 
mic conditions, if not giving rise to them in the first 
instance ; observing no developmental processes by 
which one form of life laps over upon another, and fol- 
lowing no order but that of universal harmony in the 
Divine intendment. There is struggle and rivalry for 
existence, even among the same classes, orders, genera, 
and species, and the smallest and .weakest must give 
place to the largest and strongest everywhere, and vice 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 231 

versa, as Time, the greatest of all rodents, gnaws away 
at the mystical tree of life. But in every living organ- 
ism, from the lowest and simplest to the highest and 
most complex, all bioplastic spinners of filamentous 
tissue, all plastide weavers of membranous or spun 
matter, all epithelial bobbin-runners, and other ana- 
tomical helpers and workers, perform their respective 
tasks under the special supervision we have named, 
that is, under the higher unit of life. They all work 
for the advancement and well-being of the higher or- 
ganism of which they form a component and necessarily 
subordinate part. 

The fact that Professor Beale has discovered that 
what he calls bioplasm and germinal points or bioplasts 
may take on a distinct and separate color from tissue, 
when subjected to a solution of carmine in ammonia, 
is no evidence that he has penetrated the adytum of 
this sacred temple of Life, wherein lies the " mystery of 
mysteries." It is an important discovery so far as trac- 
ing tissue is concerned, but it admits him into no higher 
mystery within the temple built by God than another 
may attain to by the accidental discovery that the tissues 
may take on the same color in some other solution — by 
no means an improbable discovery. Carmine in am- 
monia is not the only solution that may aid science in 
the investigations now being carried forward by the 
vitalists and non-vitalists with so much bitterness and 
asperity of feeling between them ; and now that Pro- 



232 TRUE GENESIS. 

fessor Beale has made his happy discovery, it is by 
no means certain that some other equally persistent 
worker in this interesting field of inquiry may not hit 
upon quite as happy a discovery in the same or some 
equivalent direction — one that shall throw the bioplas- 
mic theory as far into the shade as Mr. Cook thinks 
the bioplasts have already thrown the cells. 

But decidedly the most objectionable statement of 
Professor Beale, although one confidently re-affirmed 
by our " Boston Monday Lecturer," is that which 
makes bioplasm and bioplasts the only " living matter." 
We have already referred to the phrases " living mat- 
ter " and " non-living matter" as altogether objection- 
able in biological statement, since they are more than 
half-way concessions to the materialists, who contemptu- 
ously order the vitalists to take a " back seat " in the 
discussions now going forward as to the true origin of 
life. But the objection we here make is less techni- 
cal, and touches a far more vital point in the inquiry. 
It is true that Professor Beale speaks of " formed mat- 
ter," as if it were a peculiar something — a sort of ter- 
Hunt quid — between living and non-living matter. But 
he distinctly avers that the substance which turns red 
in his carmine solutions is the "only living matter," 
and hence asserts, inferentially at least, that all other 
matter, in any and every living organism, is " dead 
matter." But we may just as confidently aver that no 
matter is living in any vital organism which has not 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 233 

been assimilated and built up into living membranous 
tissue capable of responding (in the case of man) to 
his will, as well as performing the autonomous func- 
tions of plants and the lower animals. For all these 
membranous tissues are innumerably thronged with 
bioplasts or plastide particles, not for the purposes of 
obedience to man's will, or of performing any autono- 
mous function, but simply to supply the tissues with 
the necessary nutrient matter to make up for the con- 
stant waste that is going on in a healthy living organ. 
This waste is very much greater than has heretofore 
been supposed, so that the man or animal of to-day 
may be an entirely distinct and separate one, consid- 
ered materially, from that of a year or more ago. And 
this averment would have a decided advantage over 
Professor Beale's, since, in meeting a friend, we might 
be certain that four-fifths of him at least was alive, 
while the other one-fifth was industriously at work to 
keep him alive, instead of a stalking corpse, as he would 
otherwise be, upon the street. Besides, it would obvi- 
ate the necessity, on the part of the vitalists, of giving 
themselves four-fifths away to the materialists, as Pro- 
fessor Beale virtually does in the argument. 

The too rude touch of a child's hand will rob the 
canary bird of its life — stifle its musical throat, hush 
its most ecstatic note, still its exquisite song, and ren- 
der forever mute and silent its voice. But where are 
Professor Beale's bioplasts which, but a moment before, 



234 



TRUE GENESIS. 



were not only weaving the nerves, tissues, muscles, 
bones, and even the wonderful plumage of this canary 
bird, but plying the invisible threads of song — throwing 
off its chirps, carols, trills, quavers, airs, overtures and 
brilliant roulades, as if the little vocalist had caught its 
inspiration from the very skies? Where, we repeat, are 
these bioplasts now? They are all quietly and indus- 
triously at work as before. The occupant of the song- 
mansion is gone, but not one of these bioplasts has 
dropped a clew, thrown down a shuttle, abandoned a 
loom, or fled in dismay to the core of its cell. They 
still pulsate, throb, throw off tissue. No chemical change 
has yet intervened to break down their cell-walls, or in- 
terfere with the occupations assigned them. The ma- 
chinery that ran their looms is stopped — that is all. 
The invisible shuttles have ceased to ply — the meshes 
of their tangled webs are broken — the more delicate 
threads of song are snapped in sunder, but the bioplastic 
spinners and weavers are all there. Not one of them 
has been displaced from its seat, nor in any way dis- 
turbed or molested in its work. If they are conscious of 
any danger, it is that the occupant of this little song- 
mansion has suddenly stepped out — is no longer present 
to direct their tasks. The icy hand of decay and death 
will soon be upon them — these poor bioplastic weavers 
of tissue — but the vocal spark, the " bright gem instinct 
with music/' is beyond the reach of these dusky mes- 
sengers. Where it is, not man, but the Giver of all life 



MATERIALISTIC THEORIES OF LIFE REFUTED. 235 

knows. We only know, when our faith is uplifted by 
inspiration, that — 

" The soul of music never dies, 

Nor slumbers in its shell ; 
'Tis sphere-descended from the skies, 
And thence returns to dwell." 



CHAPTER IX. 

FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION AND OTHER 
LIFE THEORIES. 

AMONG the more startling, if not decidedly bril- 
liant, vital theories which have been advanced 
within the last few years, is that which makes life an 
" undiscovered correlative of force." Those who have 
the reputation of being the profoundest thinkers and 
delvers in the newly-discovered realm of Force-corre- 
lation in. Europe, and who have more or less mod- 
estly contributed to that reputation themselves, have 
evidently thought to eclipse, if not to entirely throw 
into the shade, the great exploit of Leverrier, in point- 
ing out the exact place in their empirical heavens 
where the superior optics of some future observer shall 
behold, in all its glory, this " undiscovered correlative of 
force/' which they have indicated as lying within the 
higher possibilities and potentialities of matter. Pre- 
cisely what they mean by this undiscovered correlate, 
is what puzzles us quite as much to determine as it does 
the materialists to explain. Were they to define life as 
an " undiscovered force " simply, their definition would 
manifestly lack in brilliancy what it would conclusively 
make up in precision and accuracy of definitional state- 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 



237 



ment. But such a poor metaphrastic and half-circular 
exposition of vital force would never answer the necessi- 
ties of that profounder profundity required for the suc- 
cess of modern scientific treatises. Hence the interpola- 
tion of this " correlative " of theirs. Let us ascertain, if 
we can, what it means, since they are so chary of in- 
forming us themselves. 

A " correlate " of a thing — any thing — simply im- 
plies the reciprocal relation it bears to some other thing. 
As a cognate term it expresses nothing, can express 
nothing, but reciprocity of relationship, such as father to 
son, brother to sister, uncle to aunt, nephews to nieces, 
etc. As applied to vital force, it means nothing more 
nor less than that this particular force stands in some 
sort of relationship to the other forces of nature, or, as 
they would have us believe, the material forces of nature. 
And the simple strength or potentiality of this relation- 
ship is what makes all the difference between the sever- 
ally related forces of the universe, since it would be as 
impossible to differentiate a fixed relationship as to 
change the nature of vital units. But whether vital 
force, as a distinct correlate, is paternal or filial, broth- 
erly or sisterly, avuncular or amital in its relationship, is 
not stated. The scientific formula, however, may be 
stated thus : As A (chemical force) is to B (molecular 
force) so is C (a third known force) to x (the vital or 
unknown force) ; so that, by multiplying the antecedents 
and consequents together, and eliminating the value 



238 



TRUE GENESIS, 



of x y we may mathematically obtain the value of vital 
force. 

But to eliminate the value of x is what troubles 
them. Herbert Spencer has tried his hand at it, but 
failed to express life under any higher correlation than 
" molecular force ; " nor can he definitely inform us 
whether either force is third or fourth cousin to the 
other. But he manifestly regards their relationship as 
constituting either a very attractive or highly repulsive 
force. In his vexation at not finding the value of x> he 
is driven from mathematical to mechanical biology, and 
gives us this new definitional value of life — that singu- 
larly contumacious quantity which so persistently refuses 
to be eliminated in scientific equations : " Life is mole- 
cular machinery worked by molecular force." But as 
Professor Beale has utterly demoralized, if not demol- 
ished, this machinery, in his recent treatise on " The 
Mystery of Life," we will spare it any further blows, and 
proceed to the consideration of " molecular force." 

Before we proceed however, to the consideration of 
this force, let us definitely understand the meaning of 
the terms we shall be called upon to use. We can have 
no difficulty in understanding the meaning of " molecu- 
lar attraction," or that force acting immediately on the 
integrant molecules or particles of a body, as distin- 
guished from the attraction of gravitation which acts 
at unlimited distances. But when it comes to ascribing 
other and higher manifestations of power to molecules, 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 239 

such as have not been scientifically shown to exist, we 
must feel our way with caution, and demand of these 
pretentious molecules, or rather of their materialistic 
backers, a reason for the faith, or rather force, that is 
in them. 

It is agreed by all physicists, as well as chemists, that 
a " molecule " is the smallest conceivable quantity of a 
simple or compound substance, as an " atom " is the 
smallest conceivable quantity of an element which enters 
into combination with other elements to form material 
substance. For instance, the smallest conceivable quan- 
tity of water is a molecule, while the smallest conceivable 
quantity of either of the two elements of which water 
is composed, is an atom. In every molecule of water, 
therefore, there are three elementary atoms, two of hy- 
drogen and one of oxygen. And since a molecule, as 
a general rule, contains two or more atoms, and may 
contain many of them, why not predicate dynamic force 
of the atoms, which lie one step nearer the elementary 
forces of nature? For the mightiest forces of nature lie 
in these elements, when forced into unnatural alliances, 
or chained up in durance vile. It is in the elements of 
matter, and not in its molecules, that this tremendous 
dynamic force resides. Man, knowing this, harnesses 
them into his service, first by forcing them into un- 
natural alliances, as in the case of charcoal, sulphur and 
saltpetre, and then successfully pitting them in conflict 
against the rocks and the general inertia of matter. To 



240 TRUE GENESIS. 

charge all the destructive work they do on the innocent 
and harmless molecules, which are two steps removed 
from the actual force expended, is drawing conclusions 
from the sheerest hypothetical data. It is the office of 
" molecular force," if there is any meaning to the term 
beyond what is expressed by " molecular attraction/' to 
conserve matter — bind rocks together, not rend them in 
sunder. 

If the dynamic forces of nature lie pent up in the 
molecules, then man must array molecular force against 
molecular force in order to rend rocks and tear moun- 
tains in sunder. This theory of molecular force, as ex- 
tended to vital physics in the force-doctrine of life, is 
irreconcilably at war with the principal phenomena of 
life, and should be classed with the other undiscovered 
correlates of force, which Professor Beale speaks of as 
" the fictions of a mechanical imagination." The truth 
is that these much abused and much slandered mole- 
cules are the most innocent and harmless things in 
nature. They never become destructive unless some 
other force than that inhering in themselves drags them 
into its service and hurls them along a devastating path. 
Of themselves, they are the very quintessence of qui- 
essence in the universe, and, when formed in nature's 
laboratory, at once seek quiet and loving companion- 
ship with kindred molecules, and retain it forever after- 
wards. The idea that they should break away from their 
loving molecular embrace, and, by any process of differ- 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 



24I 



entiation or constructive agency of their own, seek an 
alliance with some living dog-germ in order to be built 
up into living dog-tissue, presents about as perverse and 
wayward an impulse on the part of matter as can well 
be imagined by the scientific mind. That the dog-germ 
should seek to get hold of, and differentiate them, we 
can well understand. The Circean witchery and entice- 
ment is all on the part of the dog-germ, not in the in- 
clination of the molecules. 

If there is any truth in this molecular-force-theory 
of life, it is about time for us to discard some of the old 
categories respecting matter, motion, and life, and sub- 
stitute new ones in their place. In the multiplicity of 
new scientific terms constantly springing up for recogni- 
tion in these days, there ought to be no difficulty in 
expressing the true categories, and assigning to them 
their proper definitional value. To include physical 
force, chemical force, molecular force, and vital force all 
under one and the same category, and then interpret 
their several modes of action on any theory of force-cor- 
relation, is not emancipating language from the gross 
thraldom into which their " molecular machinery " has 
driven it. Besides, there is moral force, mental force, 
the force of will, the force of reason, the force of honesty, 
the force of fraud, etc., and any number of other forces, 
all possessing more or less impetus or momentum, and 
capable of binding or coercing persons and things, in all 
their diversified relations, correlations, incidences, coin- 



242 



TRUE GENESIS. 



cidences, affinities, antagonisms, and so on through an 
interminable chapter of interchangeable predications. 
All these different expressions of force are to be tethered 
together — definitionally bound hand and foot — under 
the one explanatory head of " force-correlation. " We 
protest against the labor of thus unifying all the nat- 
ural forces of the universe, even if it were practicable 
under scientific methods. 

But Professor Tyndall denies that '* molecular group- 
ings " and " molecular motions " explain anything — 
account for anything — in the way of explicating life- 
manifestations, or determining what life is.* And it 
would be difficult to cite a stronger and more deter- 
mined materialist as authority on the point we are con- 
sidering. He says : " If love were known to be associ- 
ated with a right-handed spiral motion of the molecules 
of the brain, and hate with the left-handed, we should 
remain as ignorant as before, as to the cause of mo- 
tion. " But there is no proof that the molecules of the 
brain manifest any other motions than those necessary 
for keeping up the normal condition of health and vital 
activity in the brain itself. No one can be certain 
that he has seen these molecules in a state of mental 
activity ; for where portions of the human brain have 

* Professor Beale, in one of his very latest works says : " Of the chemi- 
cal and physical forms of energy something is known, but of the relation- 
ship of the so called vital energy, nothing has been proved. We only 
know that the influence it exerts is altogether different from that which 
has been traced to physical and chemical energy.' ' 



FORCE-CORRELA TION, DIFFERENTIA TION. 243 

been exposed to microscopic examination, even in 
perfect states of consciousness on the part of those 
whose brains have been laid bare, there can be no cer- 
tainty that the molecular action, if any, is referable to 
one set of movements more than another. And even 
in the case of animalcules, as seen in the object glass 
of the microscope, there is no absolute certainty that 
their quick, darting or jerking movements are due to 
any life-manifestation, as heretofore assumed. Some 
quite as well defined forms are entirely motionless, and 
if all were so, it would be idle to predicate vitality of 
them.* These infinitessimal and constantly varying 
forms, many of them not the one hundred-thousandth 
part of an inch in length, to say nothing of their other 
dimensions, may owe their oscillations, wave move- 
ments, darting and other manifestations, and even their 
molecular arrangements and re-arrangements, to other 
causes than those strictly " vital." And it should be 
borne in mind that their actual movements are just as 
much exaggerated under the microscope as their real 
dimensions. But as they make their appearance in 

* It is admitted, even in the case of Bacteria, whose movements are 
the most uniform, that they are sometimes so inert and languid as to show 
no movements at all ; while, at other times, they exhibit mere Brownian 
movements or those no more nearly allied to " life " than the minute par- 
ticles of carbon escaping from the flame of a kerosene lamp. And among 
the most distinguished microscopists, it is a question whether these infu- 
sorial forms, those exhibiting the most active oscillations, are really vegetal 
or animal in origin ; in other words, whether they are Fungus-spores or 
Torula- cells, or whether they may not be some intermediate forms. 



244 



TRUE GENESIS. 



organic infusions only, they are presumably vital organ- 
isms rather than fomentative or mere filamentous yeast- 
manifestations. 

Professor Huxlev, while conceding that molecular 
changes may take place under environing life-conditions, 
or in protoplasmic matter, denies that the " primordial 
cells " possesses in any degree the characteristics of a 
" machine/' nor can they undergo any differentiating 
process by which the character of their manifestations 
can be changed. And he even denies to them the 
poor right to originate or in any way modify their own 
plasma. He says : " They are no more the producers 
of vital phenomena, than the shells scattered in orderly 
line along the sea-beach are the instruments by which 
the gravitative force of the moon acts upon the ocean. 
Like these, the cells mark only where the vital tides 
have been, and how they have acted. ,, This is un- 
doubtedly true of all cells in which the vital or func- 
tional office has ceased, as in the case of Professor 
Beale's " formed matter." The cells are the result of 
the vital principle that lies behind them, and simply 
indicate where life exists, or has manifestly ceased to 
exist. Where the vital currents have ceased to flow, 
the wreck of primordial cells is quite as wide and dis- 
astrous as where millions of sea-shells have been strewn 
along a desolated and storm-swept sea-beach. They all 
come, both the cells and shells, from the preexisting 
vital units, or determinate germs, that fall into their 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 245 

own incidences of movement, without any concurrence 
of physical conditions beyond their own inherent ten- 
dency to development. For " conditions " do not deter- 
mine life ; they only favor its manifestation. 

But some of the materialists claim that what we 
call " vital units, " or invisible, indestructible germs, * 
are at best only " physical relations;" that they have 
nothing more than a hypothetical existence, without 
any independent recognizable quality justifying our 
conclusions respecting them. But may not this identi- 
cal language be retortively suggested in the case of 
their " correlates of force ? " What more than a hypo-' 
thetical existence have they ? Certainly their enthusi- 
asm to get rid of all vital conditions or manifestations, 
is quite as marked a feature in their speculations re- 
specting life as any enthusiasm we have shown in the 
verification of vital phenomena, on the established law 
of cause and effect. They insist upon this law in the 
case of statical aggregates, and even assign absolute 
identity of attributes ; but when it comes to dynamical 
aggregates, they fall back on partial identity only, and 
deny the presence of the law altogether. 

Nor are they any more felicitous in their treatment 

* The difficulty of assigning any definitional value to a "primordial 
germ " is due to the vagueness of idea attached to it in the popular mind, 
as well as to the diversified theories and speculations of the scientists con- 
cerning the origin of life. We can only define it as a " vital unit," as the 
chemist defines his smallest conceivable quantity — his "primary least"— 
of an element, as a " chemical unit." 



246 TRUE GENESIS. 

of other points in controversy. In speaking of his 
" plastide particles," Professor Bastian, the most defi- 
ant challenger of vitalistic propositions now living, says : 
" Certain of these particles, through default of necessary 
conditions, never actually develop into higher modes of 
being." Here he makes the absence of " necessary 
conditions " the cause of non-development, while he 
stoutly denies that the presence of such " conditions '* 
give rise to the development of a pre-existing vital 
unit. And yet, strange to say, he speaks of the ele- 
mental origin of li living matter " as " having probably 
taken place on the surface of our globe since the far- 
remote period when such matter was first engendered." 
But how his " sum-total of external conditions," acting 
upon dead matter, can " engender " living matter, is one 
of those " related heterogenetic phenomena " which he 
does not condescend to explain. It is by this sort of 
scientific verbiage that he gets rid of the pre-existing 
vital principle, or germinal principle of life, which the 
biblical genesis declares to be in the earth itself. 

To be entirely consistent with himself, he should 
deny the existence of this germinal principle in the 
seeds of plants themselves, and insist upon the sum- 
total of external conditions as the cause of all life- 
manifestations, in the vegetal as in the animal world. 
There can be no inherent tendency, he should insist, in 
the seed itself towards structural development, but only 
external conditions acting upon " dead matter," in hetero- 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 



247 



gentic directions. The shooting down of the radicle or 
undeveloped root, and the springing up of the plumule 
or undeveloped stalk, is accordingly due to no vital 
principle in the seed, but to the complexity or entangle- 
ment of the molecules wrapped up in their integumen- 
tary environment. And this, or some similar fortuitous 
entanglement of molecules, should account for all life- 
manifestations, as well as all life-tendencies, in nature. 
These molecular entanglements should, therefore, be 
infinite in number, as well as in fortuitous complexity, 
to account for all the myriad forms of life " engendered 
from dead matter " in the material universe. 

For if there is any one thing that the materialists in- 
sist upon more resolutely than another, it is the fortui- 
tousness of nature — the happening by chance of what- 
ever she does. Formerly it used to be the " fortuitous 
concourse of atoms ; " now it is the " fortuitous aggregate 
of molecules." By what accidental or fortuitous hap- 
pening the atoms have dropped out of their scientific 
categories, and the molecules have been advanced to 
their commanding place in absolute accidentalness* is 
one of those unassignable causes in which they appar- 
ently so much delight. We can only account for it on 
the supposition that they have all become worshippers of 
that blind and accidental Greek goddess,who bore the horn 
of Amalthea and plentifully endowed her followers with 
a wealth of language and other much-coveted gifts, but 
not with the most desirable knack at disposing of them. 



248 TRUE GENESIS. 

The true cause of vital phenomena manifestly de- 
pends on these two conditions — the presence of the 
specific vital unit, and the necessary environing plasma, 
or nutrient matter, for its primary development. With- 
out the presence of both of these conditions, or condi- 
tioning incidences, there can be no life-manifestation 
anywhere. And we do not see that anything is gained, 
even in the matter of scientific nomenclature, by merely 
substituting " molecular force " for " vital force," in the 
explication of vital phenomena. Even granting that 
molecular changes do take place during the develop- 
ment of the vital units in their necessary plasmic envi- 
ronment ; it by no means follows that these changes are 
not dependent on the vital principle as it acts, rather 
than on the molecules as they act* The higher force 
should always subordinate the lower in all metamorphic, 
as well as other processes, of nature. It is the vital 
principle that differentiates matter — the aggregate of 

* Let two comrades be shot at the same instant in battle, the one 
through the heart, and the other through the arm, shattering it badly. 
What is there to prevent the surgeon from taking a piece of bone out of the 
arm of the man shot through the heart and instantly killed, and using it to 
make good the arm of the man still living? Apparently nothing but that 
the dead man's bone will not knit. He may not have been dead five min- 
utes, and Professor Beale's bioplasts might still be at work spinning matter 
and weaving tissue for the integrity of the displaced bone. Why will it not 
knit? Simply because the vital principle that differentiates matter is gone 
— can no longer act. If the integrity of the bone depended on the action 
of the molecules, and not on the vital principle, there is no reason why this 
experiment should not be a success. For the molecules are all there, and 
their action will not be disturbed for hours after the death of the man shot 
through the heart. 



FOR CE- CORRELA TION, DIFFERENTIA TION. 249 

molecules — not matter differentiating the vital princi- 
ple. No " molecules organiques " can ever differentiate 
an ape-unit into a man-unit, any more than Professor 
Tyndall can fetch a Plato out of mere sky-mist. Once 
an ape-unit, always an ape-unit ; once a man-unit, etern- 
ally a man-unit. 

Let the vitalists stick to this proposition — this etern- 
ally fixed unit as " line idee dans V entendement de Dieu" 
(to use a better French expression than English) — and 
they can fight the materialists off their own ground 
anywhere. The one sublime verity of the universe is 
that " life exists," and that it has existed from all eter- 
nity as possible in the Divine mind, and in the Divine 
mind alone. If materialistic science is disposed to butt 
its head against this impregnable proposition, it can do 
so. The proposition will stand, whatever may happen 
to the inconsiderate head. 

For science may press her devotees into as many 
different pursuits as there are starting-points to an 
azimuth circle, and command them to search and find 
out the ultimate causes of things in the universe, but the 
forever narrowing circle in one direction, and the for- 
ever widening one in the other, would utterly baffle all 
their attempted research. Whether they descended into 
the microscopic world, with its myriad-thronged condi- 
tions of life, or passed upward and outward, in Sirius- 
distances, to the irresolvable nebulae, where other and 
perhaps brighter stars might burst upon their view — 



250 



TRUE GENESIS. 



gleaming coldly and silently down the still enormous 
fissures and chasms in the heavens — the result would be 
the same. Wider and wider fields of observation might 
open upon their view, as the stellar swarms thickened 
and the power of human vision failed, but the uranologi- 
cal expedition would return no wiser than when it 
started, and Science would still be confronted with the 
same illimitability of space, the same infinitude of matter^ 
and the same incomprehensibility of the world-arranging 
intelligence that lies beyond. For He who hath gar- 
nished the heavens by his spirit — who divideth the sea 
with his power, and hangeth the earth upon nothing — 
" holdeth back the face of his throne and spreadeth his 
cloud upon it!' 

What if, in one direction, we should find those incon- 
ceivably small specks, or mere bioplastic points, which 
we call " living matter," or, in the other direction, those 
inconceivably vast world-forming masses which we call 
" dead matter," who shall say that " the secret places of 
the Most High" are not hidden from us, or that when 
the spirit of God first moved through these vast fissures 
and chasms in the heavens upon the face of all matter, 
there was not imparted to it that " animating principle of 
life " of which the biblical genesis speaks, and which we 
everywhere see manifesting itself in nature ? Surely this 
inquiry is not one to be superciliously set aside by the 
materialists, after the failure of their uranological expe- 
dition, on the ground that it does not furnish food 



FORCE- CORRELA TION, DIFFERENTIA TION. 2 5 I 

enough for scientific contemplation, without such physi- 
ological fancies as their specialists have been giving us 
in the shape of force-correlations and molecular theories 
of life. 

But speaking of the higher forces as subordinating 
the lower, suggests that there should be something more 
definitely explained regarding the hypothesis of " differ- 
entiation," on which Mr. Herbert Spencer hangs so much 
of his mathematical faith in the true explication of vital 
phenomena. The term " differentiation " is not so for- 
midable as it might seem to the general reader at first 
sight. As applied to physiological problems it should 
have the same determinate value, in expressing func- 
tional differences, as in the higher operations of mathe- 
matics. Nothing can, of course, differentiate itself, nor 
can any two things differentiate each other, even when 
functionally allied. The actual coefficient sought is the 
difference effected, in functional value, in one of two in- 
dependent variables. For all formulae in differentiation 
are constructed on the hypothesis that only one of two 
variables suffers change. The differential coefficient has 
yet to be determined which shall express the develop- 
mental changes in two variables at once. When, there- 
fore, we attempt to extend the formulae of differentiation 
to plant and animal life, we are confronted by a very 
formidable difficulty at the outset — the impossibility of 
determining an invariable coefficient for any two varia- 
bles. Besides, all attempts at differentiating an ape-unit 



252 TRUE GENESIS. 

into anything else than an ape-unit would be as impossi- 
ble as to multiply or divide cabbages by turnips, or 
sparrows by sparrowhawks. Such divisions would give 
us no quotients, any more than their differentiations 
would give us a coefficient. Physiological differentiation 
will, therefore, never help us out of fixed species or 
nearly allied types. We can bridge no specific differ- 
ences by it. In the differentiation of the horse and the 
ass for instance, the superior blood will predominate in 
the preservation of types, and even the mule will kick 
against further differentiation. Nature would so utterly 
abhor the practice as resolutely to slam the door in Mr. 
Spencer's face, if the obstinacy of the mule did not kick 
it off its hinges. 

And nature would be quite as intractable in the case 
of " force-correlation, " another of Mr. Spencer's redoubta- 
ble phrases. This term is quite recent in its application 
to animate objects, nor has it been long applied to in- 
animate. It is claimed to be a recently discovered force, 
and is one that the materialists have seized upon as the 
Herculean club with which to smite all vital theories to 
the earth. Its meaning, so far as it has any, is not dif- 
ficult to get at. The simplest way to explain it, how- 
ever, is the best. The reader is to understand that 
when he rubs two flat sticks together, the heat thereby 
engendered is not the result of friction, as all the world 
has heretofore supposed, but that the amount of force 
expended in rubbing the right-hand stick against the 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 253 

left-hand stick, is, by some law of versatility, not over- 
well defined, transferred to the two sticks, and gets so 
entangled between their surfaces that it can only reap- 
pear in another and altogether different kind of force. 
When it leaves the hands and passes into the two sticks, 
it is, as the materialists assert, vital force. But as no force 
can be annihilated, the conclusive assumption is that it still 
exists somewhere. All of it, in the first place, went into 
the two flat sticks, and, when there, ceased to be vital 
force. Some of it disappeared, of course, in overcoming 
the inertia of the sticks, but the bulk of it became en- 
tangled with the superficial molecules of the two sticks, 
and reappeared as heat — another name for molecular 
force. 

This is what is meant by the " differentiation " of 
vital force into molecular force, and vice versa. But by 
what process of rubbing, under this law of versability, 
molecular force can be reversed, or differentiated back 
into vital force, Mr. Spencer has not condescended to 
inform us. The simple truth is, and the materialists 
will be forced to admit it in the end, that there is no 
verification of this theory beyond that of mere force- 
equivalence. For instance, it has been experimentally 
determined that a certain amount of fuel expended in 
heat is equivalent to a certain amount of mechanical 
force, not mechanical work, as M. Carnot puts it. For 
force is not expended in work until it is actually gener- 
ated, and the amount generated, not that expended in 



254 TRUE GENESIS. 

work, is the real equivalence of the heat produced from 
fuel. 

Another problem is presented when it comes to 
determining the amount of generated force necessary to 
run a piece of machinery which shall accomplish a given 
amount of mechanical work. 

A far better phrase to express this equivalence of 
force has been suggested and used by several writers in 
what is called the " Transmutation of Force." For 
there is no correlation, or reciprocal relation, between 
heat as originally produced by the consumption of fuel 
and the force as engendered in steam before it is trans- 
muted into work. Nor is there any real equivalence as 
between the two forces after its transmutation. A very 
large per centage of heat is lost in its transmutation 
from a latent form in fuel to an active or available form 
in steam, and a still greater loss in its transmission into 
work by machinery. Theoretically, there may be such 
an equivalence as that named, but practically it is im- 
possible to realize it. And a theory that is impossible 
of realization is of no practical utility in itself, and of 
little value as the basis of further theory. If, then, the 
theory of force equivalence is a failure in practical ap- 
plication, it furnishes a very poor basis on which to 
predicate force-correlation, or the doctrine of reciprocal 
forces. It is estimated, for instance, that a pound 
weight falling seven hundred and seventy-two feet, will, 
in striking the earth, impart to it a degree of heat 



FORCE-CORRELA TION, DIFFERENTIA TION. 255 

equivalent to raising one pound of water i° F. But 
the heat thus imparted can never be so utilized as to 
raise a pound weight seven hundred and seventy-two 
feet into the air. 

This shows that there is no actual reciprocity of 
relationship between the force as originally engendered 
and finally expended in work. Nor can it be shown 
that the original force is transmuted or changed 
into another and different kind of force by the opera- 
tion. The force generated and the force expended 
are essentially one and the same, as much so as that 
transmitted from the power to the weight by means 
of a rope and pulley. And the quality of the force 
is not changed, whether the weight be lifted by 
machinery or the human hand. Force, in its mechani- 
cal sense, is that power which produces motion, or an 
alteration in the direction of motion, and is incapable 
of being specialized, except in a highly figurative sense, 
into a thousand and one correlates of motion. But 
these miscellaneous and figurative forces are not what 
we are considering. The doctrine of force-correlation 
takes no such wide and comprehensive sweep. It em- 
braces neither the force of wit, nor the force of folly; 
but mechanical force and its equivalents. The force 
exercised by the human hand in lifting a weight either 
with or without rope and pulley is, in every definitional 
sense of the word, mechanical force. For the arm and 
hand are only the implements, or mechanical contriv- 



256 TRUE GENESIS. 

ances of nature, by which the will-power transmutes 
itself into work, or, more properly speaking, transmits 
itself from the point of force-generation to that of force- 
expenditure. And this is precisely the office performed 
by all mechanical contrivances for the transmission — 
not transmutation — of force. And the most perfect 
machine is that which transmits the engendered force, 
with the least possible waste or abandonment, to its 
point of ultimate expenditure in work. 

All these hypothetical correlates of force, therefore, 
predicated upon the doctrine of force-transmutation, 
have no foundation in fact, since the force transmitted 
from the point of generation to the point of expendi- 
ture undergoes no change but that of direction, in its 
passage along rope, wire, belt, pulley, shafting, etc. A 
man whose limbs have been paralyzed, may still will to 
remove mountains. The will-power is the same, but 
the mechanical contrivances for its transmission are 
wanting. Of the actual point or centre of this force- 
generation, in the case of the will-power, we know noth- 
ing; but the moment the power is started on its way 
towards the point of force-expenditure, whether it tra- 
verses the nerves and tissues of the brain, or the right 
arm or the left, or a crowbar or pickaxe, it is in no 
sense distinguishable from the force that traverses a 
rope and pulley. Nor is there any evidence that it 
undergoes molecular changes, or becomes modified or 
conditioned by any nearly or remotely related force, as 



FOR CE- COR RE LA TION, D I FEE REN TIA TION. 257 

it darts along the nerves, runs through the contracted 
tissues, electrifies the crowbar, or flashes into work 
from the point of a pickaxe. Whatever produces, or 
tends to produce, motion, or an alteration in its di- 
rection, is mechanical force, no matter from what force- 
centre it may start. When we can definitely determine 
the centre of vital force, as exercised in building up 
vital structure, not in wielding pickaxes, it is to be hoped 
we shall be able to distinguish, by the proper correlates, 
vital force from that which is mechanical. But the task 
is manifestly a hopeless one with the materialists. 

Professor Beale positively denies that there are any 
such physical force-relations as those claimed by the ma- 
terialists, and asserts that vital force bears no relation, 
or correlation, to either chemical or physical force ; that 
the one is a distinct and separate factor from the other, 
and cannot be interpreted in the same force-formulae. 
He says : " The idea of motion, or heat, or light, or elec- 
tricity forming or building up, or constructing any texture 
capable of fulfilling a definite purpose, seems absurd, and 
opposed to all that is known, and yet is the notion con- 
tinually forced upon us, that vitality, which does con- 
struct, is but a correlate of ordinary energy or motion." 

But after devoting so much time to " force-correla- 
tion, " and " force-<differentiation," the advocates of 
" molecular-machinery " may feel themselves neglected 
if we dismiss their favorite hobby without further 
notice. The precise parentage of this term is dis- 



258 TRUE GENESIS. 

puted, but it has any number of putative fathers. We 
have spoken of the size of the molecules themselves, 
and the numbers of them that might be huddled to- 
gether on the point of a cambric needle without jost- 
ling. Let us now consider the size of a molecular 
machine. For each molecule runs its own machine, 
and is provident enough to see that they do not jostle. 
In fact, it is a very nice question in physics, whether 
the machines do not run the molecules, instead of the 
prevailing opposite opinion that the molecules run the 
machines. Unfortunately, the question is one that can 
never be determined. The requisite scientific data 
will forever be wanting. 

But Professor James C. Maxwell, now, or quite re- 
cently, filling the chair of experimental physics in the 
University of Cambridge, England, has furnished us with 
approximate calculations. On the strength of his ap- 
proximations we will proceed to consider the dimensions 
of these wonderful little machines. And first, it may be 
axiomatically laid down that these molecular machines, 
which either run the molecules or are run by them, can 
never exceed the size of their respective molecules. 
Conceding, then, that each one of these machines ex- 
actly fits into its own molecule, so as to present iden- 
tically the same dimensions — as well as their largest 
possible dimensions — it would require two millions of 
them, placed in a row, to make one millimetre, or the 
one three hundred and ninety-four thousandths of an 



FORCE-CORRELA TION, DIFFERENTIA TIOAT. 



259 



inch in length, or seven hundred and eighty-eight bil- 
lions of them to make one inch ! Who will ever be 
staggered at SzW^-distances, after this? And who 
will deny that an infinite world lies below the point of 
our microscopic vision, if not an Infinite kingdom and 
throne beyond our telescopic glance ? 

But, following the same high authority in experi- 
mental physics, let us consider the aggregate weight of 
these molecular machines. We will not marshal their 
aggregate numbers in a row, for an array of forty bil- 
lions of them would make too insignificant a figure for 
inspection ; but simply give their actual weight as com- 
puted under the French or metric system. Take, then, 
a million million million million of these machines, throw- 
ing in molecules and all, and they will weigh, if there is 
no indiscreet kicking of the beam, just a fraction between 
four and five grammes, or — to differentiate the weights 
— a small fraction over one-tenth of an ounce ! 

But why not get down to the atoms, of which the 
molecules are only the theoretical congeries, and mar- 
shal the " atomic forces " into line ? These embryonic 
atoms are much the braver warriors, and, when sum- 
moned to do battle, spring, lithe and light-armed, against 
the elemental foe. They are no cowardly molecules, 
these atoms, but make war against Titans, as well as 
Titanic thrones and powers. The elements recognize 
them as their body guardsmen, their corps of invincible 
lancers, their bravest and best soldiers in fight. And 



260 TRUE GENESIS. 

they are wholly indifferent as to the legions of mole- 
cules arrayed against them, and would as soon hurl a 
mountain of them into the sea as to sport with a zephyr 
or caper with the east wind. Why not summon these 
countless myriads of bright and invincible spearmen, to 
batter down the walls of this Cretan labyrinth of Life ? 
An army of these would be worth all the molecules that 
Professor Maxwell could array in line, in a thousand 
years. No life-problem need remain unsolved with their 
bright spears to drive the tenebrious mists before them. 
Even Professor Tyndall's " fog-banks of primordial haze" 
would be ignominiously scattered in flight before these 
atomic legions. Let our materialistic friends summon 
them, then, to their aid. The field of controversy will 
never be won by their molecular " Hessians." The in- 
effably bright lancers that stand guard over the elemental 
hosts are the light brigade with which to rout the vitalis- 
tic enemy. Advance them then to the front, and, be- 
neath the shadowy wing of pestilence or some other 
appalling ensign of destruction, the abashed vital squad- 
rons will flee in dismay. 

But let us pass from scientific speculations to alleged 
scientific facts. In a paper read by Dr. Hughes Bennett 
before the Royal Society of Edinburgh, in 1861, its 
author says : " The first step, in the process of organic 
formation, is the production of an organic fluid ; the 
second, the precipitation of organic molecules, from 
which, according to the molecular law of growth, all other 



FORCE-CORRELATION, DIFFERENTIATION. 26 1 

textures are derived either directly or indirectly." Here 
again the molecules, and not the elementary atoms, are 
advanced to the front, and not a little anxiety is shown, 
in a definitional way, to identify vital processes of growth 
with crystalline processes of formation. But Dr. Bennett 
entirely mistakes, as well as misstates, the process of vital 
development, if he does not overlook the law governing 
the formation of crystals. There can be no symmetri- 
cally arranged solids in an inorganic fluid without the 
presence of some law, or principle, definitely determining, 
not the " precipitation," but the " formation," of crystals. 
The inorganic particles are not precipitated or thrown 
downward, any more than they are sublevated or thrown 
upward. The process is one of formation, not precipita- 
tion. Every crystallographer, not hampered by mate- 
rialistic views and anti-vital theories, admits the pre- 
sence of a fixed and determinate law governing each 
crystalline system, whatever may be the homologous 
parts or the unequal axes it represents. 

And so of the equally undeviating law of vital growth. 
Life comes from no mere " precipitation of organic mole- 
cules," as Dr. Bennett would have us believe. If so, 
what is it that precipitates the molecules ? They can 
hardly be said to precipitate themselves. To precipitate, 
in a chemical sense, is to be thrown down, or caused to 
be thrown down, as a substance from its solution. What, 
then, causes the molecules to be thus precipitously 
thrown down from a fluid to a solid, or a semi-solid, 



262 TRUE GENESIS. 

state? It cannot be from any blind or inconsiderate 
haste on the part of the molecules themselves. There 
must be some independent principle, or law of nature — 
one presupposing an intelligent law-giver — to effect the 
" precipitating process," if any such really exists. 

But it does not exist. The first step is one of 
development and growth — the manifestation of functional 
activity — the building up of organic or cellular tissue. 
The exact process, in the case of seed-bearing plants 
and trees, is well known. All those familiar with the 
characteristic differences of seeds, their chemical con- 
stituents, their tegumentary coverings, rudimentary 
parts, etc., thoroughly understand the process in its 
outward manifestation. There is no precipitation of 
molecules as in an organic fluid, unless the albumen lying 
between the embryo and testa of the seeds, and constitu- 
ting the nutriment on which the plant feeds during its 
primary stages of growth, can be called a fluid. It 
throws none of its characteristic ingredients downward 
any more than upward. Indeed the greater tendency 
of its molecules is upward rather than downward, in 
the " molecular processes " (vital ones) by which the em- 
bryonic cell is started upon its career of plant-life. The 
celebrated Dr. Liebig says of this albuminous environ- 
ment: "It is the foundation, the starting-point, of the 
whole series of peculiar tissues which constitute those 
organs which are the seat of all vital actions." In the 
case of animal life, this albumen abounds in the serum 



FOR CE- CORRELA TION, DIFFEREN TIA TION. 263 

of the blood, enters largely into the chyle and lymph, 
goes to build up the tissues and muscles, and is the chief 
ingredient of the nerves, glands, and even the brain 
itself. And in all these developmental stages, its tend- 
ency is to coagulate rather than precipitate. In its co- 
agulated condition, it dries to a hard, partially translucent 
and friable state, and is more or less insoluble in water, 
and entirely so at a temperature from 140 to 160 F. 
When the seed is planted or placed in water, it first 
commences to swell from the absorption of the water 
or moisture of the ground by the pores of its external 
covering, the favorable temperature being from 6o° to 
8o° F. It gradually expands until its outer membranes 
burst, and its initial rootlets clasp their hold upon the 
earth. From this point its several stages of develop- 
ment are well known to the ordinary observer. Here 
the first step is absorption and expansion, not precipi- 
tation. There is also a change in chemical conditions, 
the water at least being decomposed. For it would 
seem to be a law of vegetal growth that reproduction 
should begin in decomposition and decay. The Apos- 
tle's description of the " death of the grain, " as symbo- 
lizing the death of man, in his first Epistle to the 
Corinthians, points conclusively in this direction. It is 
in the decomposition and decay of the grain that the 
implanted germ is quickened into life — ascends into 
the bright light, the warm sunshine, the refreshing pres- 
ence of showers and dews. In this way it fulfils its 



264 TRUE GENESIS. 

providential purpose of yielding to the sower the more 
munificent life which he is forever seeking to attain. 

Its*germination is the springing up of the inner living 
principle of the grain, not its outer envelope or dead 
husk. This disappears in decay, except the small nutrient 
portion v/ithin which the germinal principle of life would 
seem to reside, and. which undergoes a thorough chemi- 
cal change in the process of passing from death unto 
life, or being assimilated and taken up into the new 
living structure. The Apostle's comparison distinctly 
marks these several changes as the one process of pas- 
sing from death unto life. He saw in this wonderful 
provision of nature, the still more wonderful prevision 
of God. To his mind it was over the debris of the dead 
past that the living present is constantly marching to- 
wards a higher and more perfect life — the ultimate 
fruition and joy of an eternal home in the skies! And 
he saw that the two grand instrumentalities and co-ac- 
cessory agencies to this end, were Life and Death, both 
equally constant and active, like all the other instrumen- 
talities and governing agencies of the universe. Life is 
forever unlocking the portals of the present to youth 
and vigor ; Death is forever closing them to age and 
decrepitude. This divine prevision thus becomes the 
wisest and most beneficent provision. Without life there 
would be no such thing as death, and without death no 
such thing as this grand succession and march of life — 
this passing from out the Shadow into the Day. 



CHAPTER X. 

DARWINISM CONSIDERED FROM A VITALISTIC STAND- 
POINT. 

GRANTING that the assumption of Darwinism rests, 
as claimed, on the fixed and inflexible adaptation 
of means to ends, in the diversified yet measurably 
specialized processes of nature, there is no logical deduc- 
tion to be drawn therefrom but that which traces the 
representatives of all the great types of the animal king- 
dom to one single source, and that not the Sovereign 
Intelligence of the Universe, but a mere " ovule in pro- 
toplasm/' or what may be defined, in its unaggregated 
form, as an inconceivably small whirligig, having motion 
on a central axis, but whether an independent motion of 
its own, or one derived from an Infinite Intelligence, the 
Darwinian systematizers are not bold enough to aver. 
They have too many a priori scruples either to assert 
the one proposition or to deny the other. What set 
this little whirligig in motion is a mystery that lies be- 
yond the purview of science, so called, and into the 
depths of this infinitessimal and most mysterious little 
chamber they refuse to go. 

They search not for the evidence of an Infinite Intel- 
ligence in the outermost circle of the heavens where the 



266 TRUE GENESIS. 

highest is to be found, and where a bound is set that 
we may not pass, but shutting their eyes to all the 
grander evidences of such an Intelligence, they dive 
down into the infinitessimal realm of nature and assume 
to dig out the sublimer secrets of the universe there. 
And this is their grand discovery: That this infinites- 
simal whirligig of theirs has not only whirled man into 
existence, but the entire circle of the heavens, with the 
innumerable host of stars that march therein, and all the 
boundless systems of worlds that roll in space. With 
this subordination of the Infinite to the infinitessimal, 
of intelligence to insensate matter, of divine energy, so 
to speak, to blind molecular force, they are satisfied ; and, 
like the mole in the fable, conceive their little molecule 
to be the only possible creator of a stupendous universe. 
Scrutinize my propositions closely, and see if I am 
guilty of misstating theirs. Their new theory is only a 
slight modification of an old one, or the old adage, omne 
vivum ex ovo — all life is from an egg. For they assert 
that every living thing primordially proceeds from an 
ovule in protoplasm, the essential part of the protoplas- 
mic egg, so to speak, being this little ovum or cellule, 
from which have issued all possible organisms in both 
the vegetable and animal kingdoms. Nor is this theory 
essentially confined to organic matter. A scientific co- 
ordination of its several known parts, or alleged func- 
tions, extends the operations of this infinitessimal 
whirligig to the plastic or uniformly diffused state of all 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 2 6j 

matter, from which has been evolved, in an infinite 
duration of past time, not only life in its highest mani- 
festations, but a universe so stupendously grand that no 
amount of human intelligence can grasp the first con- 
ception of it. 

Mr. Emerson — our Ralph Waldo — virtually accepts 
this theory of development, substituting, however, a stom- 
ach for an ovule, and the reverse of the Darwinian prop- 
osition, in what he is pleased to call " the incessant oppo- 
sition of nature to everything hurtful." It is not the 
" selection of the fittest " but the " rejection of the un- 
fit," by which " a beneficent necessity (I use his lan- 
guage) is always bringing things right." " It is in the 
stomach of plants," he says, " that development begins, 
and ends in the circles of the universe." " 'Tis a long 
way," he admits, " from the gorilla to the gentleman — 
from the gorilla to Plato, Newton, Shakespeare — to the 
sanctities of religion, the refinements of legislation, the 
summits of science, art, poetry." 

Few persons, I take it, will dispute this proposition. 
The road is a long one and beset with all sorts of thorns 
and briars, such as Mr. Emerson's philosophy will hardly 
eradicate from the wayside. Even the most refined em- 
piricism will find it difficult to stomach his stomachic 
theory of the universe, which lands all atomic or corpus- 
cular philosophy in a digestive sac, such as Jack Falstaff 
bore about him with its measureless capacity for pota- 
tions and Eastcheap fare. It is a road too in which Mr. 



263 ' TRUE GENESIS. 

Emerson's philosophy will get many sharp raps from an 
external world of phenomena, in the futility of both his 
and the Darwinian hypothesis to explain away the in- 
dependent origination of certain species of plants and 
animals — new varieties still springing into existence, 
under favorable conditions, in obedience to the divine 
flat, " Let the earth bring forth." 

In laying the foundations of this new science, if 
science it shall be called, we must insist that the course 
of nature is uniform, and that, however extended our 
generalizations in any one of her lines of uniformity, all 
intermediate, as well as ultimate propositions, must not 
onlv be stated with the utmost scientific accuracy, but 
the logical deductions therefrom must also be uniform, cr 
lie in the path of uniformity. The earliest and latest in- 
ductions must either coincide or approximate the same 
end. No links must be broken, no chasms bridged, in 
the scientific series. There must be a distinct and sepa- 
rate link connecting each preceding and each succeeding 
one in the chain. The lowest known mammal must be 
found in immediate relationship with his higher con- 
gener or brother, not in any remote cousinship. There 
must be no saltatory progress — no leaping over interme- 
diate steps or degrees. The heights of science are not to 
be scaled per saltum, except as degrees may sometimes 
be conferred by our universities.* 

* It is safe to adhere to the Leibnitzian axiom, Natura non agit salta- 
tint. 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 269 

There are some fish-like animals, say our Darwinian 
systematizers, like the Lepidosirens and their congeners, 
with the characteristics of amphibians ; and hence they 
infer that by successive deviations and improvements the 
lower order has risen into the higher. But out of what 
page in the volume of nature, in the countless leaves we 
have turned back, has the immediate congener dropped, 
that we are obliged to look for the relationship in thirty- 
fourth cousins ? We might as well say that some of the 
Infusoria possess the same or similar characteristics, and 
predicate relationship between them and the amphi- 
bians ; for giants sometimes spring from dwarfs and 
dwarfs from giants. At all events, our diagnoses must 
be freed from these intermediate breaks or failures in the 
chain of continuity, or the doctrine of descent must 
tumble with the imaginary foundations on which it is 
built. And bear in mind that the most enthusiastic 
Darwinist is forced to admit that there are still rigid 
partitions between the lower and higher organisms that 
have not been pierced by the light of scientific truth, 
but they assume that future discoveries and investi- 
gations will solve the difficulty. But science, inflex- 
ible as she is, or ought to be, in her demands, ad- 
mits of no assumptions, much less sanctions such ex- 
ceptions and deviations as we constantly find in the 
Darwinian path of continuity. The eye of imagina- 
tion can supply nothing to her vision. She is eagle- 
eyed, and soars into the bright empyrean — does not 



2/0 TRUE GENESIS, 

dive into quagmires and the slime of creation after 
truth. 

But let us see how Mr. Darwin bridges one of the 
very first chasms he meets with in constructing his chain 
of generation. He goes back to the first link, or to what 
he calls primordial generation. Here the leap is from 
inorganic matter to the lowest form of organic life — from 
inanimate to animate dust. The chasm is immense, as 
all will agree. But he bridges it by falling back on his 
infinitessimal whirligig — his primum mobile — or on the 
motions of elements as yet inaccessible, except to the 
eye of imagination. For even Plato's monad, or ultimate 
atom, was not matter itself, being indivisible, but rather 
a formal unit or primary constituent of matter, which, 
like Mr. Darwin's whirligig in its unaggregated form, 
admits of neither a maximum nor a minimum of com- 
prehension ; but rests entirely on imaginary hypothesis. 
And we may here add that a system which begins in im- 
aginary hypotheses and ends in them — as that of bridg- 
ing the chasmal difference between a gorilla and a Plato 
— can be dignified into a science only by a still greater 
stretch of the imagination — that of bridging the differ- 
ence between the Darwinian zero and his ninety degrees 
of development in a Darwin himself! 

Bear in mind, as we proceed, that the function of an 
argument in philosophy, as in logic, is to prove that a 
certain relation exists between two concepts or objects 
of thought, when that relation is not self-evident. In 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



271 



the Darwinian chain we have, as the first link, organic 
life springing from inorganic matter, without the slightest 
relation existing between the two, except what may be 
universally predicated of matter itself, whether animate 
or inanimate, organic or inorganic; and there is no other 
affirmative premise, expressing their agreement as ex- 
tremes, that can possibly admit of an affirmative con- 
clusion. The parts are so separated in thought that 
no metaphysical or ideal distinction exists to coordinate 
them in classification. We are simply forced back, in 
our attempt at classification, upon the intuitions of con- 
sciousness, where reason manifestly ceases to enforce 
its inductions. 

And here the human mind intuitively springs an 
objection which is at once aimed at the very citadel of 
Darwinism. On what rests the validity of these intui- 
tions except it be that " breath of life," which, as we 
have before said, was breathed into man w T hen he be- 
came a living soul? If we follow the divine record, 
instead of these blind systematizers leading the blind, 
we shall have no difficulty in establishing the validity of 
these intuitions — the highest potential factors this side 
of Deity to be found anyw T here in the universe. For if 
our intuitions are not to be relied upon — if their objects 
and perceptions are to be discarded as unreliable— then 
there can be no agreement or disagreement between 
sny two ideas presented, objectively or subjectively, to 
the human mind. No processes of mental analysis or 



272 



TRUE GENESIS. 



ratiocination, like those pursued in the elementary- 
methods of Euclid, can present the basis of an intellec- 
tual judgment, or lay the foundation of the slightest 
faith or belief in the world. To deny the primary per- 
ception of truth by intuition is as fatal to " Evolution " 
as to the sublimer teachings of the Bible Genesis. 

But from the very nature of our being, as well as 
the primary datum of consciousness itself, we must rest 
the validity of these intuitions on something, and that, 
something more than a finite intelligence ; and since 
science, with all her knowledge methodically digested 
and arranged, furnishes no clue to the mystery, we are 
left to the higher sources of inspiration to reach it. 
And this inspiration, however it may be derived, neces- 
sarily becomes a part of our intuitions, since it addresses 
itself to the strongest possible cravings of the human 
soul, and is accepted as its inseparable companion and 
guest. 

Shall we build our faith then on the Divine Word, — 
on the Word that was in the beginning with God, and, 
when incarnate, was God, — or on Mr. Darwin's little 
whirligig that originally set everything in motion, and 
has only to go on ad infinitum to whirl us out a God, as 
it has already whirled us out a Darwinian universe with- 
out one. For if this ovulistic whirligig has bridged the 
chasmal difference between protoplasm and man, since 
the transition from inorganic matter to organic life, the 
process has only to be indefinitely extended to bridge 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



2/3 



the chasm between man and Deity, or between finite 
and infinite intelligence. This gives us nature evolving 
a God, instead of the doctrine of the old Theogonies, of 
a God presiding from all eternity over nature ; one " who 
laid the foundations of the earth that it should not be 
removed forever; who stretchest out the heavens like a 
curtain ; who layeth the beams of his chambers in the 
waters ; who maketh his angels spirits ; his ministers a 
flaming fire." 

These evolutionists manifestly get the cart before 
the horse in their category of cosmological events. It 
is not inert matter organizing itself into life, nor any 
mode of physical or chemical action, nor any mere mani- 
festation of motion or of heat, nor any other conceivable 
correlation of natural forces. None of these has en- 
abled us to penetrate the mysterious inner-chamber of 
life itself. For reasons obviously connected with our 
own welfare, He, from whom alone are " the issues of 
life," seems to have ordained that we should fathom 
the depths of both physical and chemical force, and 
beneficently wield and direct them to our own uses. 
But this vital force ; this something that stands apart 
from and is essentially different from all other kinds of 
force, is of a nature that baffles all our efforts to ap- 
proach. The power to grasp it, or even to penetrate in 
the slightest degree its mysteries, is delegated to none. 
All attempts to lay bare this principle of vitality, or level 
the barriers that separate it from physical or chemical 



274 



TRUE GENESIS. 



action, have utterly failed. We know no more of its 
essence now than was known a thousand years ago, and 
know no less than will be known a thousand years hence. 
To become masters of the mystery, we must enter the 
impenetrable veil within which the Infinite Intelligence 
of the universe presides, — who, we are told, " sendeth 
forth his spirit, and we are created, who taketh away our 
breath, we die and return to our dust." * 

We are just as much bewildered in respect to this 
vital principle in our classifications of the myriads of 
little creatures careering over the field of the micro- 
scope, as when we turn to the most marked formations 
of genera and species in geological distribution. The 
great trouble with Mr. Darwin's vinculum is, that its 
weakest links are precisely where the strongest should 
be found, and vice versa. With a candor rarely dis- 
played by a writer who is spinning a theory, he admits 
this. The geological record is not what he would have 
it to be. Whole chapters are gone where they are most 
needed, and nature's lithography seems constantly at 
fault. Independent species are now and then spring- 
ing up where derivatives should be looked for, while 
derivatives are everywhere disappearing in non-deriva- 

* One of the most cultured classes of Christian believers in our day, holds 
that " all life is from the Lord ; " that " He is the fountain, and we only the 
streams thence." And this, they claim, is true of all life. To " take away 
our breath," therefore, is to cut off this stream perpetually flowing from its 
invisible source — the fountain of all Life. When scientific methods sub- 
stitute for a first cause a mere resultant effect, all primary principles disap- 
pear in their intermediates. 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



*7$ 



tives. Many of the middle Tertiary molusca, and a 
large proportion of the later Tertiary period, are specifi- 
cally identical with the living species, of to-day. What 
has " natural selection " been doing for this family in 
the last million years or more ? Manifestly nothing, and 
less than nothing, for some of the species have dropped 
out altogether. 

These facts, and hundreds of others like them, are 
constantly obtruding themselves upon our attention to 
show, in harmony with the Bible Genesis, the immuta- 
bility of species — the absolute fixity of types — rather 
than their variability, as claimed. If nature abhors 
anything more than a vacuum, it is manifestly any 
marked transition from fixed types, and she thunders 
her edicts against it in the non-fertility of all hybrids. 
The doctrine of variation lacks the all-essential element 
of continuity, and is oftener at war with the theory of 
the " selection of the fittest," than it is with the selec- 
tion of the " unfit." " The leap from Lepidosirens to 
Amphibians is no greater than the interval between any 
two species of animals or plants yet discovered, either 
fossil or living. The intervals are as numerous as the 
species themselves, and everywhere constitute great and 
sudden leaps, or such transitional changes as " natural 
selection " could not have effected independently of 
intervening forms — those that nowhere exist in nature, 
and never have existed, if we are to credit geologic and 
paleontologic records. There is everywhere similarity 



276 TRUE GENESIS. 

of structure, but not identity ; and the nearer we ap- 
proach to identity of structure the wider the divergence 
in similarity of characteristics. A bird may be taught to 
talk and sing snatches of music. But no monkey has 
ever been able to articulate human sounds, much less 
give them rhythmical utterance. 

Take the case of the wild pigeon, a subject that 
especially delights Mr. Darwin. Most of the deviations 
are confined to the domesticated breeds, and none of 
these rank in strength, hardiness, capability of flight, 
or symmetry of structure, with the wild or typical bird. 
There are well-defined deviations, but no sensible im- 
provements, except to the eye of the bird-fancier. The 
deviations are simply entailed weaknesses, or the very 
reverse of what should appear from the " selection of the 
fittest. " The fact undeniably is, that these variations 
are almost wholly abnormal — mere exaggerated charac- 
teristics, induced in the first instance, perhaps, by high 
cultivation and close in-and-in breeding. 

Turn these abnormal varieties loose, let them go 
back to the aboriginal stock, and these characteristics 
will rapidly disappear; that is, they will ultimately lose 
themselves or melt away in the original type. Mr. 
Darwin admits that the tendency will be to reversion, 
but he insists, manifestly without any positive proof 
therefor, that the greater tendency is to new centres of 
attraction, and not necessarily the primitive one. But 
this is mere assumption — sheer begging the question on 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 277 

his part, — since all the oscillations are incontestibly 
about the original or type centre. 

The same may be said of the typical races of men, 
like the negro and wild Indian of our prairies. You 
may lift them out of their primitive condition — tempo- 
rarily suspend, if you please so to put it, their primor- 
dial attraction,— but, left again to themselves, they will 
go back to the original type ; that is, their offspring 
will again infest the jungles and roam their native 
hunting-grounds. The process here is the very reverse 
of the Darwinian theory. Reversion, as a rule, follows the 
degeneracy of types, instead of there being any favora- 
ble homogeneous result, springing from a new centre 
of attraction. The Indian makes a splendid savage, but 
a very poor white man. Think of Red Jacket taking the 
part of Mercutio in the play or enacting the more val- 
iant role of Falstaff in King Henry the Fourth. An in- 
fusion of white blood does not help the matter, but 
rather makes it worse. Generally, the meanest Indian 
on the continent is your half-breed, and among the 
negroes there is no term so expressive of the contempt 
of that race, as that applied by them to a mulatto. The 
present condition of Mexico affords a striking exempli- 
fication of this law of reversion. The inheritable char- 
acteristics or variations, produced from an infusion of 
Spanish blood, are rapidly disappearing — the native 
blood whipping out the European. The potency is in 
the inferior blood, simply because it is the predomina- 



278 TRUE GENESIS. 

ting one. The result has been no homogeneous new 
race, but a reversion, now manifestly in progress, to the 
type centre or aboriginal stock. And the curse pro- 
nounced by Ezekiel upon mongrel tribes — u woe unto 
the mingled peoples " may have a significance in this 
connection worth considering ; but it manifestly falls 
outside the scope of our present inquiry. 

In considering the embryological structure of man, 
and the homologies he therein presents to the lower 
animals, Mr. Darwin thus conclusively (in his judgment) 
remarks : " We thus learn that man is descended from a 
hairy quadruped, furnished with a tail and pointed ears, 
probably arboreal in his habits, and an inhabitant of the 
Old World." 

But Mr. Darwin's pronominal " we." in this connec- 
tion, admits of qualification. He can hardly speak for 
all the scientific world at once. The philosophical 
maxim of Sir Isaac Newton — hypotheses 11011 jingo — I 
build no hypotheses, make no suppositions, but adhere 
to facts — has a few followers still left. But what are 
Mr. Darwin's facts? Has he yet discovered the caudal 
man, except as the ever-fertile Mr. Stanley heard of one 
in Africa? And where is his monkey that first lost the 
prehensile power to climb trees? For bear in mind that it 
was the loss of this prehensile power that resulted in the 
caudal atrophy of our monkey progenitors, who became 
men simply because they were tailless monkeys ! They had 
lost their power to climb trees, and accordingly had no 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



279 



longer any use for tails to let themselves down from the 
limbs. A " beneficent necessity *' therefore, according to 
Mr. Emerson, dropped the tail as something decidedly 
" unfit. " For the simplest tyro in Darwinian philosophy 
will see that the loss of the Catarrhine monkey's tail, if 
it ever occurred, could not have resulted from the " se- 
lection of the fittest." The deeper Emersonian phil- 
osophy of the "rejection of the unfit," affords the only 
solution of the difficulty, and then only on the assump- 
tion that the tail is an unfit appendage for the monkey. 
With the loss of his tail, in the light of this new gen- 
esis, the monkey necessarily ceased to be arboreal in 
his habits. He could no longer subsist on the fruits 
and nuts of trees, or take refuge therein from his 
enemies. He had to go to work and make weapons to 
defend himself — to construct tools — make and set traps, 
live on his wits, and not on his prehensile power to climb 
trees. He soon discovered, of course, that the longest 
pole knocked the persimmon. This was his first intel- 
lectual stride towards the future Edison. From the 
simplest sort of Grahamitic philosopher he passed into 
the robust, beef-eating Englishman. But this was not 
all. As an arboreal gymnast, he was manifestly on 
his way to more masterly feats of agility than ever, — 
those dependent, not on muscular function, but on the 
nervous action of the brain and spinal marrow. Neces- 
sity became with him the "mother of invention," and 
how admirably he improved under this maternal in- 



2 SO TRUE GENESIS. 

structor we are left to infer from the paramount con- 
clusion of Mr. Darwin, that the demoralized monkey be- 
came the incipient man ! 

But this conclusively accounts for only one of the 
many anatomical differences between man and his caudal 
progenitor. For why should the loss of his tail have 
resulted in the changed chemistry of the monkey's 
brain? or in the increased involutions of his brain even? 
The specific differences between the present and an- 
cestral types are very numerous and demand separate 
classification. Their variability runs through every bone, 
muscle, tissue, fibre, nerve. Their blood corpuscles are 
not the same. The chemistry of their bones essentially 
differs. The nerves are differently bundled and differ- 
ently strung. In intonations of voice — symmetry of 
arms, legs, chest — hairlessness of body, and aquatic and 
land habits, the frog is a much nearer approach to man 
than the monkey, as all caricaturists, delineating alder- 
manic proportions, will agree. And Mr. Darwin might 
have immortalized himself by deriving the builders of 
the ancient pile-habitations and other primitive water- 
rats and croakers of the Swiss lakes, from this tailless 
batrachian. For everybody knows, or thinks he knows, 
how the frog lost his tail. If he didn't wag it off, he 
certainly absorbed its waggishness as a distinguishing 
characteristic of the " coming man " — the future Arte- 
mas Wards and Mark Twains of the race. This ances- 
tral origin will also account for the otherwise unaccount- 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED, 28 I 

able proclivity of all human juveniles to play at the 
game of leap-frog ! Besides, it would have relieved 
Mr. Darwin from one of the greatest perplexities he has 
had to encounter. As he derives man from a hairy 
quadruped, the absence of hair on the human body, is a 
phenomenal fact that gives him great trouble. He 
agrees that it does not result from " natural selection," 
as he says " the loss of hair is an inconvenience and 
probably an injury to man." Nor does he suppose it 
to result from what he calls " correlated development." 
He is more puzzled over this problem of divestiture 
than any other, and finds the solution of it only in 
" sexual selection." That is, he assumes that among our 
semi-human progenitors, far back in the Tertiary or some 
other period, some female monkeys were less hirsute 
than others, and that they naturally preferred males pos- 
sessing similar characteristics. These divergencies were 
thus commenced, and, by continuous " sexual selection," 
the infirmity (for such he regards the loss of hair) was 
propagated until the race was almost entirely denuded 
or bereft of this covering. In the same way he accounts 
for nearly all the differentiations of the race, among the 
various tribes now or formerly inhabiting the earth. All 
have sprung from the same semi-human progenitors — 
apes that lost their capacity to subsist as apes, and hence 
found it necessary to subsist as men ! 

The law of degeneracy has, therefore, had quite as 
much to do with human origins as that of progressive 



282 TRUE GENESIS. 

development. In fact, it is the paramount law from a 
Darwinian standpoint. For the loss of hair and of the 
prehensile power to climb trees are both conceded by 
Mr. Darwin to be serious defects and drawbacks in the 
ape family. 

But the law of sexual selection, as treated by the 
evolutionists, is not scientifically accurate, nor is it true 
in fact. The loving tendency of nature is to opposites, 
not likes. The positive and negative poles are those 
that play into each other with most marvellous effect. 
Each repels its like and rushes to the embrace of its 
opposite. Extremes lovingly meet everywhere. A 
brunette selects a blonde and a blonde a brunette, as a 
general rule in matrimony. A tall man or woman, 
with rare exceptions, chooses a short companion for 
life. Dark eyes delight in those that are light, and 
vice versa. Everywhere nature seeks diversity, not sim- 
ilitude. The gayest and brightest feathered songster 
craves companionship in modest and unobtrusive colors. 
Diversity is the law of life, as equality, or versimili- 
tude, is that of death. Neither natural selection, nor 
sexual selection, runs counter to this law. If Mr. Dar- 
win's theory were true, that likes selected likes, then 
the two marked extremes which should have charac- 
terized the race, soon after its emergence from the semi- 
human state, should have been giants and pigmies, Gar- 
gantuas and Lilliputs. Otherwise " sexual selection," 
as treated by its author, plays no intelligible part in the 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 283 

economy of nature, except to counterbalance variability, 
not to propagate it. 

But the Darwinian assumption that the primeval 
man, or his immediate ape-like progenitor, came through 
" natural selection/' that is, through the " survival of 
the fittest," is subject to one or two other objections 
which we shall briefly notice. And the first objection 
is not altogether a technical one. The term " fittest, " 
as applied to a monkey, has at once a definite and 
comprehensive significance to us. It implies the pres- 
ence of whatever is most perfect of its kind in the 
monkey as a monkey, and not in the monkey as some- 
thing else than a monkey. They are all admirably 
adapted for climbing trees; and it is this adaptation 
that secures them safety, or complete immunity, in 
shelter from their enemies. To say that nature selects 
the fittest for them — for any species of monkey — by 
converting their forefeet into rudimentary hands, with 
a loss of prehension and no corresponding advantages 
in locomotion, is to use language without any apprecia- 
ble significance to us. We can only say that what is 
fittest for the monkey is ill-fitted for man, and the re- 
verse. This is all we can definitely predicate of them, 
from what we know of their anatomical structure, and 
the diversified uses to which it may be put. 

The fact is, as the Bible genesis shows, that every 
living thing is perfect of its kind, and whatever is per- 
fect admits of no Darwinian variations or improve- 



284 TRUE GENESIS. 

ments for the better. And the simple statement of 
this undeniable proposition is, we submit, a complete 
refutation of Darwinism. When the waters and the 
earth were commanded to bring forth abundantly of 
every living creature and every living thing, " it was 
so, and God saw that it was good/' that is, everything 
perfect of its kind, and in its kind. With this single 
limitation as to kind, a rattlesnake is no less perfect 
than a Plato or a John Howard. 

When we consider man's upright position ; the firm- 
ness and steadiness with which he plants his foot upon 
the earth ; when we examine the mechanism of his 
hand, and the wonderful and almost unlimited range 
it possesses for diversified use ; when we see how ill- 
fitted he is for climbing trees, yet how express and ad- 
mirable for climbing among the stars, even to the out- 
ermost milky-way, the idea that what is fittest for him 
is fit for the chattering monkey, is too absurd to give 
us pause. And yet how does Mr. Darwin know that 
the monkey has been climbing up, all these hundred 
thousand or million years, into man, as one of the con- 
genital freaks of nature, and not man shambling down 
into the monkey as a reverse congenital freak. Chil- 
dren have sometimes been born with a singular resem- 
blance to the ape family, but no ape has ever, to Mr. 
Darwin's knowledge, produced issue more manlike than 
itself. The divergencies run the wrong way to meet 
the conditions of the development theory. We have 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



285 



had nearly five thousand years in which to mark these 
transitional changes, and yet the monkey of to-day is 
identical with that painted on the walls of ancient 
Meroe. In all this time he has made no advance in 
the genetic relation ; and if we turn back the litho- 
graphic pages of nature for a hundred times five thou- 
sand years, we shall find no essential departure from 
aboriginal types. 

But the Darwinian hypothesis admits of a more 
conclusive answer than we have yet given. Past time, 
it will be conceded, is theoretically if not actually in- 
finite ; and in all past time, nature has been tugging 
away at Mr. Darwin's problem of the " survival of the 
fittest." It is no two hundred and fifty thousand 
years, nor two hundred and fifty millions, but an in- 
finite duration of past time that covers the period in 
which she has been wrestling with this problem. How 
successfully has she solved it? In the Darwinian sense 
of the term " fittest," she has not so much as stated 
her first equation or extracted the root of her first 
power. She is manifestly as much puzzled over the 
problem as Mr. Darwin himself. He fails to see that 
the " survival of the fittest," necessarily implies, or car- 
ries with it, the correlative proposition, — the " non- 
survival of the unfit." And when such a law has 
been operative for an infinite duration of past time, 
the " unfit," however infinitely distributed at first, 
should have disappeared altogether, many thousands, 



286 TRUE GENESIS. 

if not millions, of years ago. If the evolutionists are 
dealing with vast problems, and assigning to nature, 
unlimited factors to express the totality of her uner- 
ring operations, they must be careful to limit the time 
in which any one of her given labors is to be accom- 
plished. If she makes any progress at all, an infinite 
duration of past time should enable her to complete 
her work just as effectually as an infinite duration of 
time to come. 

But by what law of " natural selection," appertain- 
ing to a single pair of old world monkeys, have their 
offspring advanced to this regal state of manhood, while 
all other pairs have remained stationary, or precisely 
where they were two hundred and fifty thousand years 
ago or more ? Why this exceptional divergence in 
the case of a single pair of monkeys ? Why this anom- 
alous, aberrant, and thoroughly eccentric movement 
on the part of nature ? We had supposed that her 
operations were uniform — conformable to fixed laws of 
movement. The doctrine of the " survival of the 
fittest" implies this. Why then, should nature, in 
her unerring operations, have selected the fittest in 
respect to a single pair of Catarrhine monkeys, and at 
the same time rejected the fittest in the case of a mil- 
lion other pairs? If she had selected only the fittest 
in respect to this old world stock of monkeys, the entire 
Catarrhine family should have disappeared in the next 
higher or fitter group — a group nowhere to be found 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED, 287 

in ecological distribution. The break between man 
and this Catarrhine monkey covers quite a series of 
links in the genetic vinculum ;* and yet between the 
two we find no high form of a low type fitting into 
a low form of a high type, as we manifestly should, 
to account for all the diversified changes that 
must have taken place in the interim. And what is 
true of the types is measurably true of the classes 
within the types, as well as of the orders within the 
classes. Wide deviations in forms, as in characteristics, 
would seem to be the invariable rule ; the blending of 
type into type, except perhaps in remote relationships, 
is nowhere visible. 

But if " variation " and " natural selection " have 
played important parts in the economy of nature, why 
may not " specific creation " have played its part also? 
Positive science can hardly flatter itself with the belief 

* Professor Marsh, of Yale College, has predicted that the " missing 
link " will be found in Borneo — evidently not crediting Mr. Stanley's state- 
ment about its presence in the interior of Africa. But one " missing link " 
is hardly enough ; there ought to be an extensive family of them to com- 
plete Mr. Darwin's plexus. From the lowest genetic form to the anthro- 
poid ape is a distance which does not half cover the length of this plexus — 
the immense gap between the monkey and the man being decidedly the 
greater length of chain. And yet the first half of the chain is traversed by 
innumerable forms — millions of links, so to speak. How, then, is the 
greater length of the plexus to be covered by a single " missing link ? " A 
long line of caudal ancestry must be dug up, therefore, in Borneo, and 
shipped to the Peabody Museum, before this tremendous stretch in the chain 
of animated nature is satisfactorily accounted for. Borneo must be exceed- 
ingly rich in osteologic remains, even to bridge the chasm between its own 
ourang-outangs and the Dyaks, or aboriginal inhabitants, of that island. 



288 TRUE GENESIS. 

that it is rolling back the mystery of the universe to a 
point beyond which " specific creation *' might not have 
commenced, or the divine fiat been put forth. To be- 
lieve in the possibility of a rational synthesis, limited to 
sensible experience, or phenomenal facts,, within our 
reach, that shall climb from law to law, or from concrete 
fact to abstract conception, until it shall reach the Ul- 
tima Thul'e of all law, is to carry the faith of the scien- 
tist beyond the most transcendental belief of the theolo- 
gian, and make him a greater dupe to his illusions than 
was ever cloistered in a monastery or affected austerity 
therein as a balm to the flesh. We may substitute new 
dogmatisms for old ones, but we can never postulate a 
principle that shall make the general laws of nature any 
less mysterious than the partial or exceptional, or that 
shall in the long run, render " natural selection " any 
more comprehensible, or acceptable to the rational 
intuition, than " specific creation." For while one class 
of scientists is climbing the ladder of synthesis, by assign- 
ing a reason for a higher law that may be predicated of 
a lower, we shall find the broader and more analytical 
mind accepting the higher mystery for the lower, and, by 
divesting its faith of all metaphysical incumbrance, land- 
ing in the belief of an all-encompassing law, which shall 
comprehend the entire assemblage of known laws and 
facts in the universe. And the natural drift of the human 
mind is ever towards this abstract conception — this one 
all-encompassing law of the universe. It steadily specula- 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



289 



lates in this direction, and some of the highest triumphs 
of our age, in physical as well as metaphysical science, are 
measurably due to this tendency. The scientific mind 
is not confined wholly to experimental research. It is 
stimulated to higher contemplations, and is constantly 
disposed to make larger and more comprehensive group- 
ings of analogous facts. It is fast coming to regard light, 
heat, electricity, magnetism, gravitation, chemical affin- 
ity, molecular force, and even Mr. Darwin's little whirli- 
gig, as only so many manifestations or expressions of 
one and the same force in the universe — that ultimate, 
all-encompassing, divine force (not to speak unscientifi- 
cally) that upholds the order of the heavens, "binds the 
sweet influences of the Pleiades, brings forth Mazzaroth 
in his season, and guides Arcturus with his suns." 

It is the boast of the Darwinian systematizers that 
their development theory not only harmonizes with, but 
admirably supplements and out-rounds the grander 
speculation of Laplace, termed the " Nebular Hypothe- 
sis," which regards the universe as having originally 
consisted of uniformly diffused matter, filling all space, 
which subsequently became aggregated by gravitation, 
much after the manner of Mr. Darwin's little whirligig, 
into an infinite number of sun-systems, occupying in- 
conceivably vast areas in space. Of the correctness of 
this hypothesis it is unneccessary to speak. It is to the 
Darwinian speculation what the infinite is to the infini- 
tessimal, and we only refer to it to bring out the vast- 



290 



TRUE GENESIS. 



ness of the conception as compared to the latter theory, 
and to predicate thereon the more conclusive induc- 
tion that an Infinite Intelligence directs and super- 
intends all. 

In an area in the Milky-way not exceeding one-tenth 
of the moon's disc, Mr. Herschel computes the number 
of stars at not less than twenty thousand, with clusters 
of nebulae lying still beyond. As we know that no 
bodies shining by reflected light could be visible at 
such enormous distances, we are left to conclude that 
each of these twinkling points is a sun, dispensing light 
and heat to probably as many planets as hold their 
courses about the central orb in our own system. From 
the superior magnitude of many of the stars, as com- 
pared with the sun, we may reasonably infer that many 
of these vast sun-systems occupy a much larger field in 
space than our own. This would give an area in space 
of not less than six thousand millions of miles as the 
field occupied by each of these sun-systems. And as 
the distance between each of these systems and its near- 
est neighbor is probably not less than that of our sun 
from the nearest star, we have the enormous and incon- 
ceivable distance of not less than nineteen billions of 
miles separating each one of these twenty thousand 
stars or sun-systems, occupying a space in the heavens 
apparently no bigger than a man's hand. And yet In- 
finity, as we apprehend the term, lies beyond this vast 
cluster of constellated worlds ! Where is Mr. Darwin's 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



29I 



little whirligig in the comparison, or Mr. Emerson's 
vegetal stomach, or Mr. Herbert Spencer's " potential 
factors," to express the sum-total of all this totality, — 
this gigantic assemblage of stars clustered about a single 
point in the Milky-way? The human mind absolutely 
reels — staggers bewildered and amazed — under the load 
of conceptions imposed by these few twinkling stars, and 
is ready to exclaim, — 

" Oh, star-eyed Science, hast thou wandered there, 
To waft us back a message of despair? " 

But when we reflect that all this vast aggregation of 
sun-systems, visible in the telescopic field, is not sta- 
tionary, but is revolving with inconceivable rapidity 
about some unknown and infinitely remote centre of 
the universe, how immeasurably vast does the concep- 
tion become, and how unutterably puerile and fatuous 
the thought of Mr. Darwirfs little whirligig as the author 
of it all! No wonder the inspired Psalmist exclaims; 
" The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firma- 
ment showeth his handiwork." But listen to the Dar- 
winian exclamation : " The heavens declare the glory 
of my little whirligig, and the firmament showeth the 
immensity of my little ovules." With the veil of faith 
and inspiration lifted, the words of the Psalmist swell 
into the highest cherubic anthem, while those of Mr. 
Darwin hardly rise above the squeak of a mole burrow- 
ing beneath the glebe ! 

And what presumptuous mortal shall say that this 



292 TRUE GENESIS. 

infinitely remote centre of the universe, around which 
revolves this infinite number of sun-systems, is not the 
seat and throne of the Infinite One himself — the Sover- 
eign Intelligence and Power of the universe, directing 
and upholding all? We know that some of the stars 
are travelling about this central point of the heavens at 
a pace exceeding 194,000 miles an hour, or with nearly 
three times the rapidity of our earth in its orbit. That 
there must be infinite power, not physical, at this un- 
known centre of the universe, to hold these myriads of 
sun-systems in their courses, is a logical induction as 
irrefragable as that the sun holds his planets in their 
orbits. And if infinite power is predicable upon this 
central point, why not infinite intelligence also ? Intel- 
ligence, we know, controls and utilizes all power in this 
world; why not all power in the universe? It can 
utilize every drop of water that thunders down Ni- 
agara to-day, as it has already seized upon the light- 
nings of heaven to make them our post-boy. This is 
what finite intelligence — that insignificant factor that 
science would eliminate from the universe — can do ; 
then what may not Infinite Intelligence accomplish? 

But the Darwinian systematizers object that sci- 
ence must limit itself to a coordination of the known 
relations of things in the universe, or deal only with 
phenomenal facts, not dogmatisms; forgetting that they 
dogmatize quite as extensively, in constructing their 
chain of generation, as the theologians do in adhering 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 



293 



to the Bible genesis. No theologian objects to a ra- 
tional synthesis of phenomena, limited to sensible ex- 
perience ; but, in climbing from law to law, he reasona- 
bly enough insists, that, when concrete facts rise into 
abstract conceptions, the highest round in the ladder 
shall not be knocked out for the accommodation of 
Robert G. Ingersoll or any other boasted descendant of 
a gorilla. And he also insists that when a priori specu- 
lation is lost in abstract conceptions, the highest must 
necessarily press alone upon the intuitions of conscious- 
ness, where all generalizations cease, and all synthesis 
is undeniably at an end. Here, in this mysterious 
chamber of the soul, we stand silent and alone, with 
only dim and shadowy phantoms about us, as if in the 
august presence of Deity itself. 

But how does scientific speculation propose to stifle 
these intuitions of consciousness — reduce them to the 
least of all potential factors in the universe? We will 
take the very latest of these speculations. In supple- 
menting both the Darwinian theory and the grander 
speculation of Laplace, the scientists, so called, tell us 
that the process of aggregation, or the turning out of 
new worlds in the universe, is still going on ; but that 
the time is coming when all the primeval potency or 
energy, originally inhering in diffused matter, will have 
exhausted itself in actual energy, and that then all light, 
life and motion in the universe, will cease and be at an 
end. This dissipation of potential energy is to result, 



2 9 4 



TRUE GENESIS. 



they say, in a played-out universe, as it has already re- 
sulted, they claim, in a played-out moon, if not countless 
other heavenly bodies.* All the exterior planets, or a 

* This daring hypothesis of the materialists is so utterly repugnant to all 
our ideas of a perfected Cosmos, that we have no patience with those ad- 
vancing it. It is, at best, speculation run mad, and is based on no other as- 
sumption than that of the inherent imperfectibility of the universe as it came 
from the hand of God, or from the dynamic play of molecules extending 
throughout vast geognostic epochs. 

From a materialistic standpoint this assumption of imperfectibility inevi- 
tably runs into the rediutio ad absurdum. For if, in the play of the mate- 
rial forces of the universe, an infinite duration of past time has effected 
nothing but mutually disturbing and re-adjusting movements and relations 
among cosmical bodies, then an infinite duration of time to come can effect 
nothing but similarly mutual adjustments and re-adjustments in respect to 
such bodies. With an infinity of time, space, matter and motion, every- 
where presenting a unity of phenomena in the universe, " there can never be 
anything," according to the great Stagirite, u unconnected or out of place, 
as in a bad tragedy." Conservation must, therefore, be the rule, and desi- 
nence the impossible exception. 

But these adherents of inherent imperfectibility instance the fact of 
vanished and variable stars, as well as those that have suddenly appeared, 
and, after brief periods of intense brilliancy, as suddenly disappeared, to 
show that there are mighty disturbances in the sidereal heavens which en- 
tirely negative the idea of " conservation " as a geognostic law. But the 
phenomena of variable stars, with all their apparent irregularity of motion 
and fluctuations in luminosity, are now being traced to definite and well- 
determined laws of motion, if not of light, while the theory of extinguished 
and disappearing stars belongs exclusive to the age of Tycho Brahe. Where 
there is one self-luminious body (or sun) in the interstellary spaces, there are 
probably not less than forty non-luminious or dark cosmical bodies revolv- 
ing about their respective centres of light and heat, as the attending planets 
revolve about the common centre of gravity in our own system. And this 
is especially true of that vast and fathomless star-stratum, called the Milky- 
way, in which most of these peculiar phenomena occur, with the exception 
of the variable stars only. 

That stars should vary in their intensity of light by the probable transits 
of these dark cosmical bodies across their discs, is no matter of wonder or 
astonishment : on the contrary, it is surprising that these sidereal phenome- 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED- 



2 9 5 



majority of them at least, are to be placed in this category 
of dismantled worlds, or those in which all life has 

na do not occur with much greater frequency. This would inevitably be 
the case if the planes of revolution, in the case of these non-luminious 
bodies about their central orbs, were coincident with the lines of vision from 
our own planet— a circumstance by no means improbable from the vast- 
ness of the sidereal heavens and the innumerable hosts of stars marching 
therein. Besides, these periodical variations may be accounted for in part 
— especially in the case of double stars — from their apparent rather than 
real change of place in the heavens. For if our sun-system is travelling 
towards a point in the constellation Hercules at the rate of 194 thousand 
miles an hour (the rapidity of Arcturus' flight), it is impossible to determine, 
in the present state of astronomical knowledge, whether the apparent change 
of place in any star is real or merely optical. But, in the case of double 
stars, each is travelling (independently of its other motions) about the com- 
mon centre of gravity obtaining in its own system, and these relative move- 
ments may account for the greater or less intensity of light as the two stars, 
viewed as one, present a greater or less area of luminosity in their united 
surfaces. 

The assumed revolution of one of these stars about the other — thus de- 
stroying all the known analogies of the universe, as exemplified in our own 
system — may be accounted for in the same way. With stupendous planetary 
systems revolving about each of these apparently double stars, they must 
respectively have a revolution, real as well as apparent, about their own 
centres of gravity — not one and the same centre, but different and far dis- 
tant centres. Lying in nearly the same line of vision, with planes of move- 
ment at right angles with it, they would necessarily present the appearance 
of one star revolving about the other — an apparent motion only. 

And the writer here ventures an explanation of the phenomena of tei7i- 
poi'ary stars, or those making their appearance in the heavens, flaming up 
into stars of the first, second and third magnitudes, and then disappearing 
altogether. The most remarkable of these stars, or apparent stars, was that 
of Tycho Brahe in 1572, presenting its maximum brilliancy at the very first, 
but gradually diminishing in size until the end of seventeen months, when 
it disappeared, without change of place, from the heavens. This temporary 
star was visible in Cassiopeia, on the verge of the Milky- way, within whose 
swarm of stellar worlds most of these apparent stars have made their ap- 
pearance. Tycho Brahe, in seeking to account for this stellar phenomenona, 
advanced the theory that stars might be " formed and molded out of cos- 



296 TRUE GENESIS. 

hopelessly ceased and become extinct. All has utterly 
disappeared, or, to paraphrase one of Pope's couplets, 

mical vapor," or " vapory celestial matter," as the elder Herschel put it, 
" which becomes luminous as it condenses (conglomerates) into fixed stars." 
But any such rapid condensation of "vapory matter," in the light of La- 
place's " nebular theory," is manifestly too absurd for scientific recognition. 
A more satisfactory explanation may be here suggested : — Supposing the 
apparent relative position of any six or seven stars of the sixth magnitude in 
the Milky-way, should be so changed by the combined motions of our sun- 
system and of the stars themselves, as to throw them into one and the same 
line of vision, but so clustered together as to show their several star-discs as 
one, we should unquestionably have a star of the first magnitude, which 
would continue as long as this extraordinary stellar conjunction should last. 
As one after another of these stars should fall out of line, by reason of the 
combined motions named, the apparent star would be diminished from the 
first to the second magnitude, and so on until it reached the sixth magni- 
tude, when it would pass beyond the reach of unaided human vision. But 
as the star of Tycho Brahe suddenly appeared at its fullest brilliancy, it may 
be objected that this suggested theory fails to meet the required conditions. 

As 18,000,000, out of the 20,000,000, of telescopic stars lie in the Milky- 
way, it is not by any means improbable that such a conjunction of stars may 
occur therein as often at least as once or twice in a century. We certainly 
see brilliant patches of closely-crowded stars, in great numbers, in this galac- 
tic zone, and the fact that these temporary stars almost uniformly appear in 
that zone renders the suggestion here made quite as rational, in the way of 
speculation at least, as that of " vapory celestial matter " suddenly con- 
densed into a star of the first magnitude, as Sir. William Herschel would 
have us believe was possible, if not probable. 

Besides, it is a definitely ascertained fact that such clusters of stars, lying 
in almost the same line of vision, exist in various parts of the heavens, which 
present to the naked eye the appearance of a star of the fourth or fifth mag- 
nitude, and probably would, if more thickly clustered, present that of a star 
of the first magnitude. But powerful telescopes resolve them into a large 
number of stars, from the thirteenth to the fifteenth magnitude. One such 
cluster in Andromeda's girdle has been resolved into not less than fifteen 
hundred small stars of very low magnitude, and pretty widely scattered in 
the telescopic field. Alexander Von Humboldt, in speaking of stars that 
have thus disappeared, says that " their disappearance may be the result of 
their motion as much as of any diminution of their photometric processes 



DARWINISM CONSIDERED. 

1 Beast, bird, fish, insect — what no eye can scan, 
Nor glass can reach — from zoophyte to man." 



297 



All these dismantled planets, and satellites to planets, 

(whether on their surfaces or in their photospheres), as would render the 
waves of light too weak too excite the organs of sight." And he adds: 
11 What we no longer see is not necessarily annihilation/' repeating at the 
same time the question of Pliny — " Stella an obi?'ent nascerenturve t " 

But another, and (to our mind) more satisfactory, explanation of these 
stellar phenomena, may be hazarded in this connection : There are, for in- 
stance, in the Milky-way, among the more brilliant clusters of stars, dark 
granular spots, of greater or less magnitude, in which the most powerful 
telescopes show no glints or traces of stars. They are among Humboldt's 
smaller " fissures or chasms in the heavens/' in which he asserts that there 
is a great paucity of stars, or none at all. Now, if one of these thick 
stellar clusters, which show to the naked eye as a single star, should, by the 
combined cosmical movements of our sun-system and the stellar group in 
question, pass into the field of one of these small rents or " fissures " in the 
galactic curtain — that lying in front of the stellar cluster — it would imme- 
diately show as a star of possibly the first magnitude, and would continue 
to shine as a star of that magnitude so long as it remained in the field of 
the narrow rent or fissure. It would shine out suddenly like a star through 
a rift in the clouds of a dark night, and disappear as soon as it had traversed, 
or apparently traversed, the rift in question, 

This galactic curtain, it should be borne in mind, is made up of 18,000,- 
000 of stars, or sun-systems, and not less than 720,000,000 dark cosmical 
bodies revolving about their respective centres of gravity. If the " nebular 
theory" of the universe be true, this is unquestionably the exact condition 
of things in the Milky-way. Of the more distant stars in this crowded gal- 
axy, we can only catch, even in the telescopic field, mere glints of light as 
the intervening swarms of stellar and planetary worlds thicken in the fore- 
ground and shut out the more distant view. It is only through these rents 
and fissures in this great galactic curtain that the brighter stellar clusters 
beyond can ever be seen ; and these glints of far distant light, showing 
dimly through this curtain, may account for the peculiar milky appearance 
of the galaxy, arising from the loss of chromatic power in the full beams 
themselves. It was undoubtedly through one of these rents in the galactic 
curtain that the condensed starry cluster of Tycho Brahe suddenly made its 
appearance in the outer fringes of the Milky- way, and remained visible for 
a period of seventeen months. 



298 TRUE GENESIS. 

are only so many immense cinders — mere refuse slag — oi 
no conceivable interest to science, except to predicate 
the ultimate conclusion — "a played-out universe, result- 
ing from a played-out potency within the universe. " 
The magnificent clockwork of the heavens will then 
have run down, with no Darwinian whirligig to wind 
it up again, and the terrible reality of Byron's dream, 
which it would seem was not all a dream, be realized 
in the bright sun extinguished, the stars darkling the 
eternal space, rayless and pathless, and the icy earth 
swung blind and blackening in the moonless air. 

Oh, if this be star-eyed science, give us anything in 
place of it ! Blear-eyed bigotry in his cloistered den, 
mumbling unintelligible prayers, and believing that 
man is to be saved, not by what he does, but by a 
credo only, is far preferable to it. But oh, how un- 
speakably preferable the simple faith of the star-led 
Magi, who 

" Deeming the light that in the east was seen 
An earnest and a prophecy of rest 
To weary wanderers, such as they had been," 

came on that bleak December night, 1880 years ago, to 
pay their homage to the Christ-child — the long expected 
Messiah — the Redeemer of the world ! 

THE END. 



■ 



,V.7i 



■ 




*m 






1 1 









■ 



.-yjP 










HB 


«*■>/ ■ 




1 ■ 









Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



' ■ 




■■ 



M 






,-•?*;■ 



■ 



I ■ 

H 
Hm ■ 



I 

■ 

■ 

BBS 

■ 

■ 



■ 



^■r 










